Skip to main content

Full text of "Archeology of the Bynum Mounds, Mississippi"

See other formats


3 1604 015 927 090 



ARCHEOLOGY OF THE 



BYNUM MOU 



MISSISSIPPI , AT c„ 



EZ T 





TIONAL PARK SERVICE • U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 



r EO0UL 






ARCHEOLOGY OF THE 



BYNUM MOUNDS 



MISSISSIPPI 




by John L. Cotter and John M. Corbett 

With additions by 

Marshall T. Newman, Volney H. Jones, Henry W. Setzer 

and]. P. E. Morrison 



Archeological Research Series Number One 
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR • WASHINGTON • 1951 



1 his publication is the first of a series of re- 
search studies devoted to specialized topics 
which have been explored in connection with 
the various areas in the National Par\ System. 
It is printed by the Government Printing Office 
and may be purchased from the Superintendent 
of Documents, Government Printing Office, 
Washington 25, D. C. Price y$ cents. 




United States Department of the Interior 
Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary 

National Park Service 
Arthur E. Demaray, Director 



Contents 



Introduction 1 

The Setting 2 

Excavations 5 

Methods 5 

Mound A 5 

Mound B 6 

Mound C 9 

Mound D 9 

Mound E 11 

Mound F 11 

Village site 11 

Ceramic Analysis 17 

Type descriptions 17 

Baldwin Plain 17 

Saltillo Fabric Impressed 18 

Furrs Cordmarked 18 

Tishomingo Cordmarked 19 

Tishomingo Plain 19 

Houlka Gray 19 

Minority wares 20 

Miscellaneous sherds 21 

Analysis of pottery found in association with 

mounds, features, and burials 22 

Conclusions 30 



Page 

Nonceramic Analysis 37 

Copper 37 

Galena 39 

Stone 40 

Flaked stone 40 

Ground stone 41 

Raw materials 42 

Conclusions 42 

Specialists' Reports 43 

Skeletal material (Dr. Marshall T. Newman) . 43 

Vegetal material (Mr. Volney H.Jones) ... 48 

Animal bones (Dr. Henry W. Setzer) .... 49 

Shell material (Dr. J. P. E. Morrison) .... 50 

Analytical Site Summary and Comparative 

Statement 51 

Conclusions 57 

Tables 59 

Bibliography 67 

Plates 69 

Index Ill 



in 



Acknowledgments 



no report of this size and scope ever is accomplished without 
the unstinted help of many people. It is impossible to mention 
and thank everybody involved, but the authors do wish to express 
their appreciation to all who concerned themselves in any way 
with the Bynum excavations. Special appreciation is expressed 
to Superintendent Malcolm Gardner of the Natchez Trace Park- 
way, Regional Archeologist J. C. Harrington, Dr. Jesse D. 
Jennings, Parkway Engineer H. R. Smith, and Engineering Aide 
Sidney Holditch. We are indebted to Mr. Arthur Woodward, 
of the Los Angeles County Museum, for identification of many 
of the historic trade goods found with the late Chickasaw burials. 
Mr. Woodward's comments have been included in the text dis- 
cussion of the remains. 

As usually happens, the burden of the routine work fell on 



a few people without whose constant efforts and willingness this 
report would not have been possible. The authors wish to express 
their great appreciation to Miss Joyce Anderson, secretary at the 
Natchez Trace Parkway; Mr. Parker Lancaster, foreman in the 
field; and Mr. John C. Stone, laboratory assistant. 

To the people of Houston, Miss., near which the Bynum site 
is located, the authors wish to express their thanks for the con- 
stant sympathetic interest they displayed in the excavations while 
they were in progress. 

Since the Bynum site, purchased by the Mississippi State High- 
way Commission as part of the right-of-way for the Natchez 
Trace Parkway, had not at the time of excavation been transferred 
to Federal ownership, the permission to work granted by the 
commission is hereby acknowledged. 



IV 



Foreword 



the natchez trace parkway memorializes a series of Indian 
paths that became a wilderness roadway between Natchez and 
Nashville and then between 1800 and 1830 successively a post 
road and highway binding the Old Southwest to the Union. 
The early Indian inhabitants of this country used a network 
of beaten paths as hunting courses, warpaths, or trails linking 
village with village and tribe with tribe. Pioneer settlers called 
such a trail a trace, a word which in old French suggests its 
origin as a line of footprints or animal tracks. Use of these 
trails by prehistoric Indians is suggested by the remains of mounds, 
villages, cemeteries, and fortifications located along the different 
routes. 

After the coming of the white man, the Natchez Trace assumed 
increasing importance as it was used for a military, commercial, 
and postal road in the expansion of the United States into the 
Old Southwest. 

The Parkway, which is to be 450 miles long, is now under 
construction and will commemorate the old Natchez Trace. Like 
the Trace it will extend from Natchez, Miss., to Nashville, Tenn., 
and will follow fairly closely the route of the old road. It will 
feature a motorway along which places of historic interest, such 
as parts of the old Trace, "stands" or inn sites, ferry sites, and 



Indian mounds, will be preserved and suitably marked to explain 
and illustrate the use of the old route. 

In order that all of the values which lend distinction and 
national importance to the Parkway may be preserved and inter- 
preted, the National Park Service is conducting basic studies in 
the fields of history, natural history, architecture, landscape archi- 
tecture, and archeology. These studies will provide the basic 
interpretation of scenes along the Parkway for the enjoyment 
of hundreds of thousands of future Parkway travelers. 

In advance of constructing section 3F of the Natchez Trace 
Parkway, near Houston, Miss., the Bynum mounds, located on 
the right-of-way, were excavated to prevent the loss of significant 
archeological remains. Studies of this material were necessary be- 
fore the remains and the site could be interpreted to the visitor. 

This publication, Archeology of the Bynum Mounds, is the 
result of those studies. No excavation is ever complete until the 
findings have been analyzed and made available to other pro- 
fessionals and laymen alike. The careful excavations of Archeol- 
ogists Cotter and Corbett have done much to increase our knowl- 
edge of a hitherto little-known archeological area and cultural 
period. For this reason, I believe this book will be a distinct 
contribution to the study of prehistoric America. 



tfLfe £&, 




VI 




Introduction 



the natchez trace parkway will be a scenic and recreational 
highway primarily for pleasure traffic. In keeping with this 
concept, the Parkway has been developed to include turn-offs to 
important archeological, historical, and natural sites along the 
route. Interpretive roadside displays, a central museum near 
Tupelo, Miss., and a leaflet will tell the story of the Chickasaw, 
Choctaw, and the earlier prehistoric Indians who lived along 
the route of the Trace. 

Indian remains are numerous throughout Tennessee, Alabama, 
and Mississippi, and the National Park Service realized that 
construction of the Parkway might damage some of them. To 
salvage in advance of construction whatever was possible for 
interpretive purposes, the archaeological survey program for 
the Natchez Trace was inaugurated under Dr. Jesse D. Jen- 
nings in January 1940. From the survey it was seen that at 
least nine important sites would be damaged in one way or 
another by construction. These nine sites, on the basis of the 
survey material, could be expected to yield a cross-sectional picture 
of the Indian cultures which were prevalent along the Trace 
from early prehistoric times down, and into, the historic period. 
Priority of excavation was assigned to these sites on the basis of 
their relative importance to the interpretive program, the immi- 
nence of their destruction, and their availability for excavation by 
being in Federal ownership. 

Top priority was assigned to the Bynum mounds, located a 
few miles east of Houston, Miss. This site consisted of a group 
of six mounds and associated village remains. The center line 
of the Parkway impinged upon the base of one of the mounds and 
cut across a section of the village area. Excavations were neces- 
sary to save whatever Indian remains might be present. 

Of the six mounds at the Bynum site, two had been previously 
so mutilated (one by a county road and one by cultivation) that 
they yielded little or no information. One other mound was left 
untouched so that in later years, if desired, the present excavations 
could be checked by more refined techniques. The remaining 
three mounds, however, in conjunction with extensive testing and 
digging in the village area, showed that the Bynum site was 
representative of a short period of American Indian life as it 
developed in the Southeast. 

The first inhabitants of what is now the southeastern United 
States were probably scattered small bands or single families of 
hunters, living in no fixed abodes but following the game and 
supplementing their meat diet with whatever wild foods they 
could gather. They did not know many of the things which 
made life easier and pleasanter for the later more sedentary peo- 
ples, such as pottery vessels for cooking and storing foods; per- 
manent houses; or the bow and arrow (they used the atlatl or 



spear-thrower instead). Being constantly on the move in search 
of game, their material possessions of necessity must have been 
scanty and limited to what they themselves could carry. Pos- 
sibly the dog was domesticated at this time, but no beasts of 
burden were known or used by the Indians of the Southeast. 
Opinions differ as to how long ago these early hunter-gatherers 
roamed the southeastern forest country, but it was undoubtedly 
several thousand years before the time of Christ. 

Many centuries passed, during which new ideas and tech- 
niques for gaining a livelihood were either learned by hard 
experience or picked up from other tribes to the west. It was 
not, however, until the advent of agriculture, that these south- 
easterners developed a stable mode of life. It is impossible for 
any people without a reliable source of food to find the leisure 
time to develop their talents in the arts, crafts, and religion. 
One reliable source of food is found in the practice of agriculture. 
By growing one or more stable food crops, supplementing that 
crop with wild game, fish, and natural wild plants, a group of 
people can lead a more sedentary form of existence and devote 
part of their time to the manufacture of clothing, housing, weap- 
ons, and even personal ornaments. 

Again, it is impossible to say just when agriculture first became 
known in this area, but present knowledge would indicate that 
it was some time in the latter part of the last millenium before 
Christ. At about the same time, or shortly thereafter, a knowl- 
edge of pottery making was acquired. With the acquisition of 
skill in agriculture and pottery production, these people became 
possessed not only of an unusually reliable source of food, but 
also of better methods of preparing and storing it. 

Many of the pottery vessels, of course, were broken in use, and 
the pieces, or sherds, were scattered around the village area. 
These little pieces of broken ware are very durable and often 
remain behind long after other traces of the people have van- 
ished. Since they were sometimes decorated, and, since vessels 
of different shape and form were made in different periods, the 
archeologist has found that these sherds make a very useful tool 
for gauging the temporal changes which take place within a 
native culture. It is really only after the advent of agriculture 
and pottery that the archeologist can begin to trace the different 
periods of development and movements of people in the South- 
east. 

At the Bynum site the first inhabitants knew the use of pot- 
tery, and probably also agriculture, though no direct evidence 
for such came to light in the excavations. They lived in circular 
houses constructed by placing logs or poles upright in the ground 
at short intervals from each other and then weaving branches 
and thin sticks between the uprights. The outside would be cov- 



ered with wet clay which would harden and dry in the sun, form- 
ing a solid wall. In the summer they probably lived largely 
out of doors, under brush lean-to shelters, and dressed themselves 
in scanty clothing. They spent their time hunting, caring for 
their crops, erecting new winter homes when necessary, making 
a sand-tempered, fabric-impressed pottery, and gathering such 
wild plant foods, fish, and shellfish as were available in the sur- 
rounding area. 

Not long after the site was first occupied (possibly around 
A. D. 700), the custom of cremating the dead was adopted. A 
large pit would be dug and covered by some type of canopy 
structure in which the cremations could take place. After the 
bodies were burned, the fragmentary bones were gathered in 
clusters, and the crematory pit was covered by a mound of earth. 
Such a mound was the one at the north end of the site, called 
mound D. 

A short time later, either a new group of people moved into 
the area, or new customs were adopted regarding the burial of 
the dead and the manufacture of pottery, for we find in mound A 
that the dead were buried in the flesh, in an extended position, 
as well as cremated in situ in a flexed position. At the same time 
there appears a new type of pottery, a clay-grit tempered ware 
with cordmarked impressions. In mound B we found a mixture 
of these and other traits, which leads to the supposition that pos- 
sibly two groups of people lived side by side at Bynum for a very 
short period and then may have combined together socially, po- 
litically, and connubially. 

Prehistoric Indians probably lived at Bynum for only a rela- 
tively short span of perhaps 100 or 200 years. Elsewhere in the 
Southeast are numerous remains of many later cultures which 
surpassed in their various techniques those represented at Bynum, 
but no evidence for these later cultures was found at Bynum. For 



some reason unknown to us, the site was abandoned after its brief 
period and was not reoccupied until late in the period of the his- 
toric Chickasaw Indians. Several burials of this historic period, 
dating around 1820-30, were found overlaying the remains of the 
earlier Bynum inhabitants. 

At the time the prehistoric Indians were inhabiting the Bynum 
site and erecting their burial mounds, other groups were living 
in a similar manner elsewhere in the Southeast. So general was 
the practice of building burial mounds (for either cremations or 
flesh burials) that this period in Southeastern prehistory has been 
called the burial mound period. On the basis of certain diagnostic 
characteristics, archeologists have divided this period in two, and 
chronologically we have Burial Mounds I and II. All the cultural 
manifestations present at the Bynum site indicate that it belongs 
only to the earlier phase of the Burial Mound period; namely, 
Burial Mound I. 

While remains of the later prehistoric Indians are absent from 
the Bynum site, they are found at other places along the Natchez 
Trace Parkway. The extremely large temple mound near Nat- 
chez, Miss., known as the Emerald mound, is an excellent example 
of the type of great structure erected as a base for temples made 
of wood and clay with thatch roofs. Such mounds and temple 
buildings were in common use throughout the Southeast in sev- 
eral large religious centers shortly before the first arrival of the 
Spaniards and other early explorers. Some few were still in use, 
especially by the Natchez Indians, when the French first saw them 
in 1716. Other sites along the historic old Trace, such as the 
Gordon mounds, Pharr mounds, and Boyd mounds, represent 
various groups of prehistoric Indians who inhabited those areas 
sometime between the occupation of the Bynum site and the 
time when the settlers and traders were moving into the south- 
eastern section of what is now the United States. 



The Setting 



the six mounds and associated village area to be discussed in this 
report are located on a 15-acre tract purchased by the State of 
Mississippi Highway Commission from "Uncle Joe" Bynum, one 
of the leading Negro farmers of Chickasaw County. The Bynum 
site, MCs-16 in the archeological survey of Natchez Trace Park- 
way, is located 3 miles east of Houston, Chickasaw County, in 
northeastern Mississippi, on a low ridge east of the main branch 
of Houlka Creek, a tributary of the Tombigbee River, in sees. 
35 and 36, T. 13 S., R. 3 E. The site, of which about seven acres 
retained sufficient original topsoil to merit testing, has an elevation 
of 335 feet above sea level. 

Physiography. The Bynum site lies at the southern extremity 
of the Pontotoc Ridge, a physiographic feature separating drain- 
age of the Tombigbee River on the east from that of the Pearl 
River, Big Black River, and other Mississippi River tributaries 
on the west. The Pontotoc Ridge is bounded on the east by the 
Black Belt or Northeast Prairie district, and on the west by the 
narrow crescent of flat land known as the Flatwoods. 

The soil of the Pontotoc Ridge is generally characterized by a 
red sandy loam derived from weathering of alternating beds of 
glauconitic sandy marl and limestones known as the Ripley For- 
mation (the uppermost division of the Cretaceous in Mississippi) 
(Lowe, 1 9 19). An exposure of highly fossiliferous marl on 
Houlka Creek half a mile southwest of the Bynum site presents 
a variety of shells, Ostrea, Exogyra, Gryphaea, Trigonia, Bacu- 
lites, and Scaphites. Although no conclusive evidence of collec- 
tion or use of these shells by the inhabitants of the Bynum site 
was observed, it is noteworthy that a fragment of one valve was 
found at the bottom of a post mold in the village site, where it 
might have served as a scooping implement. 

At present, over a century of erosive row cropping has removed 
an estimated 2 to 3 feet of topsoil at the Bynum site, completely 
or partially destroying what may have been the major portion 
of cultural deposit. The acidity of the soil here has not been 
conducive to the preservation of bone, which further reduced 
the data. 

Ecology. The climate of northern Mississippi is characterized 
by a mean annual temperature of 62.4 , with the average first 
killing frost October 30 and the last March 28. The high atmos- 
pheric humidity and average annual precipitation of 50 inches, 
coupled with an annual average of 55 days with maximum tem- 
perature above 90 , make for a long growing season in which 
certain crops can be cultivated intensively. March is the wettest 
month, with an average precipitation of 6 inches and October 
the driest, with 2 inches. Summer rains are usually local, winter 
rains general; snow averages 3 inches. 

The following observation on the vegetation of Chickasaw 
County area circa A. D. 1800, furnished by Dr. W. B. McDougall, 
Natchez Trace Parkway naturalist, would presumably carry well 
back into the prehistoric era, since no great climatic change is 
suggested for the last 800 years. 



Before white men began extensive cultivation of the soil in Chickasaw 
County, Miss., the vegetation must have consisted mainly of three types, 
hardwood forest, pine forest, and grassland. The grasslands were found 
mostly along the eastern side of the county which is a part of the so-called 
northeast prairie. This prairie was characterized by such grasses as broom- 
sedge (Andropogon virginicus), little bluestem (Andropogon scopanus), and 
bentawn blumegrass (Erianthus contorttis) as well as by many flowering 
plants such as rosinweeds (Silphiiim) and prairieclovers (Petalostemon). 
The hardwood forest, dominated by the Southern red oak (Quercus jalcata) 
along with several other species of oak, several hickories (Carya), the tulip- 
tree (Lirwdendron talipifera), and, on hills, the chestnut {Castanea dentata), 
is the climax type of vegetation in the county and it undoubtedly occupied 
extensive areas west of the northeast prairie. However, wherever the climax 
forest had been destroyed or prevented from developing by fires, forests of 
shortleaf and loblolly pines (Pinas echinata and P. teada) occurred, and these 
may have been as extensive as the hardwood forests or even more so. Of 
course, the boundary between the northeast prairie and the forested areas 
was not a sharp line clear across the county but was, in a sense, a transition 
zone. Thus, there were probably openings in the forest that were occupied 
largely by grasses and perhaps it would be a natural thing for the Indians to 
select these openings as places for the development of villages. 

From the analysis by Dr. Henry W. Setzer of animal bone 
material recovered at the Bynum site, presented on page 49, it 
will be seen that the most common game animal was deer (Odo- 
coileus virginianus) which accounted for 85 percent of all identi- 
fied nonhuman bone material in the village site. Raccoon was 
next with 10.4 percent, and fox, opossum, and bobcat with one 
specimen or 1.5 percent each. The mounds yielded no precedent 
animal bone material, and in only the fill of mound A were teeth 
of bison and beaver in small quantity. The partial skeleton of a 
domestic cat found immediately below the surface is discounted 
as subsequent to modern plowing. 

Despite the relative unimportance of any game but deer, there 
must have been many other game and nongame animals in the 
area in prehistoric times. Among the bone traces too fragmen- 
tary for identification were small fish vertebrae. It is possible that 
soil conditions adverse for preservation eliminated more small bone 
traces, including bird, of which no traces were recorded. 

Probably no important difference, except in numbers, existed 
in the reptile population of Chickasaw County between prehis- 
toric and historic times. Today the common snakes here are the 
worm snake (Carphophis amoena helenae) (Kennicott); ring- 
neck (Diadophis punctatus punctatus) (Linne); black racer {Co- 
luber constrictor constrictor) (Linne); blotched chicken snake 
(Elaphe obsoleta confinis) (Baird and Girard); blotched king 
snake (Lampropeltis calligaster) (Harlan); mole snake (Lampro- 
peltis rhombomaculata) (Holbrook); copper-bellied moccasin 
(Natrix erythrogaster erythrogaster) (Forster); Graham's water 
snake (Natrix grahamii) (Baird and Girard); diamond-back 
water snake (Natrix rhombijera rhombifera) (Hallowell); De- 
Kay's snake (Storeria def^ayi) (Holbrook); garter snake (Tham- 
nophis sirtalis sirtalis) (Linne) and cotton-mouth moccasin (Ag- 
kjstrodon piscivorus) (Lacepede). 



























1 

1 
































o 

o 






















. 




















♦ 














>s 






















<M 

z 






c 


v. 
J 
























L 








or 






































c 








































































Ul 


o 
o 
















N l ' '1 










1 










N 

z 


r~rY-° ) 




I 






'•. '• o : 




















/ 1 












t 


... 




























// 






rm 
































f 


• . O - ' • ■. 










D 








4 


1 








1 
















' 




%>2 Ct.' 








// 












F c 


1 


• 












o 
o 




«4.-. .•• 








—/■/ 






1 




o 




In- 
















c\j 
c\j 

z 






L. 


i. c 






Cm'" v- 








rt - : 






























; 
















































i? 




















„ 


'■■:.' ..V.. '.■;.. p 




















a> 








■■'o 

0:.. 


, 








■/":■ 






- — ' *.'■'. r~. ; 




. £^ 
























1 


















\ ' •;■ • • o' ...••* 


















































•■ 














<*.■ 


I"- • 

o 




»■ 








Sc 


i 


o 
o 

CNJ 

z 
















r- 








■ n_ 


tr\ 






' •••••"' 




r 


3" 


















. -o 
































o- f • 












roOJ 


























:o 












zj " 




















.0' «> 2 •••.... V<D 


„•• .• •.::':'.. • •..' 












&■ 




















.,::...'. ."??•„««•••...• '•'.'V- 


•o '.'•.*. 



































































































































:" „• .••:.' 




v*l 










o 












- 






•'••"• ' • : '°o •■ 






■J 










o 












• 1 




















r 








CM 

Z 












\:k 




















..•■-. 












- , -:•' . 








' o-° 
















J L 












•. * ' .: • *« 


M 


(r 


























■'•■'6 




















































1 


O'^ 




.;-•. 












o 




























































o 


















































0) 




























O"- 




••:': 












z 








UJ 

|— UJ 




















' 














Br* 






V .■•"•■:;.v.}>'^ r " : \" 














<*> s 






















01* 














< 
















<M 


■i •; Oo ••■■. ■ v. 




B 


ID / 












HI 


















-■*, ■:.."■■ ■■■ :.°.aP • 
















u. 


^ > 
















■• •■:.. -. ..■■> .•■•■ r 1 




r / (* e 


° \ fi 










UJ c 




i- 
u 

bl 

u. 


















" 


'•'.'■"•'' 




'•••''"■:? 




/ « 

1 1 u 


V 
































































_i i 


















J] 


•""■ §-= 


















_i s 

— r> 


UJ 

_) 
< 




















o ° 




_J 














> " 


o 

CO 


















J 


















































? 5 




















* /'■ * ^ ' ■ - \ ■ 




o o 

o 










ID § 




















2 V / 




z 










" Z S 




















\. .. y 














>- 2 

GO 




































o 
o 

CM 




o 
o 






o 

o 






o 
o 






o 

O 
UJ 




o 
o 
1- 














































UJ 




Ui 






UJ 






UJ 






UJ 




bl 







Excavations 



METHODS 

Field methods. The entire mound and village area of the 
Bynum site as defined by surface indications was laid out in a 
ioo-foot grid with a hypothetical o-o coordinate well beyond the 
site to the southwest. All points on the plan of the site could 
thus be determined by the intersection of east and north coordi- 
nates which were designated in feet and tenths, thus: N. 1800, 
E. 1785.6. In this way, the complexity of distinguishing a series 
on a o-line and using four cardinal directions or "right" and 
"left" to designate lines on the grid was avoided. 

Hub stakes were placed at 100-foot intersections and i-foot con- 
tour maps were made of all mounds. Five-foot grids were laid 
out on mound surfaces and basal areas and 10-foot grids were 
used in portions of the village to be excavated. Plats of features 
and burial locations were drawn with the use of alidade, tape, and 
plane table on a grid. Drawing on data sheets was sometimes 
facilitated by use of a 5-foot square grid oriented by set stakes and 
placed over the object or feature to be drawn. 

Notations were made on feature data and burial data forms, 
and a photographic record was made of all important locations 
with 34x5 Graflex view-type camera for black-and-white prints 
and with a 35 mm. Argus camera for kodachrome transparencies. 
The record includes 400 kodachrome and over 300 black-and- 
white photographs, all annotated on photo data sheets. Field 
specimens were assigned a serial number in the field by packaging 
in lots of identical provenience (with associated square, feature, 
or burial and depth), using a bag or box on which the number 
and data appeared in a stamped form. Identical data were entered 
on field specimen data sheets in the field. As soon as specimens 
were cleaned in the laboratory, they were individually marked 
with the field specimen number. 

Verbal descriptions were entered on continuation sheets ap- 
pended to drawings and data sheets on mounds, features, and 
burials or other subjects of observations. A daily progress log of 
the work was also kept. 

Mound excavation was initiated from 10 to 25 feet from the 
apparent basal edge of the fill, depending on the size of the mound. 
A 5-foot trench was begun, usually on the west side, extending 
well beyond the parallel diameter of the mound, and a test to 
undisturbed earth was made for post mold patterns. Additional 
5-foot strips were uncovered until the base of the mound was 
reached; then the mound wash and fill were located succes- 
sively. Excavation progressed in 5-foot cuts. Profiles were 
drawn, and a photo record was made. As inclusive features were 
found, care was taken to preserve them from damage while the 
fill above was stripped away. 



In the case of mound B, the fill was cut away in successive 
profiles to the center. Then the east side was cut away over 
the interior submound feature until the master profile at the 
approximate center was reached, leaving a 5-foot strip intact, 
tepresenting a cross section of the mound. Reason for this 
procedure was threefold: first, to provide a true pictorial cross 
section, second, to preserve an in situ exhibit which was ulti- 
mately decided against, and, third, to provide protection for the 
workmen from the north wind since the project was being carried 
en through December and January. 

At mound A work was necessarily planned to take advantage 
of the large excavation already made in the center, which was 
cleared out and extended to open the mound completely through 
the center. Profiles were then developed parallel to this cut from 
the east and west sides. 

Circular post mold patterns were tested for depth and the con- 
tents of the molds troweled out in 0.5-foot levels by developing 
a trench inside the pattern circumference and sectioning the 
molds. Thus, all molds could be accurately measured in depth. 
When superimposition of mold patterns made trenching imprac- 
tical, the molds were excavated individually in 0.5-foot levels. 

It should be noted that the Bynum site offered little opportunity 
for stratigraphic observation. The mounds were designed to 
cover burials, and were built in a continuous effort without evi- 
dent interruption so that differentiation could only be made be- 
tween contemporaneous inclusions and precedent specimens and 
features associated with village deposits sealed off by the mound 
fill. In the village site, the best point of reference was the "plow 
line" — the line of maximum penetration of the plowshare — above 
which disturbance was total, and below which objects and features 
were assumed to be undisturbed except for root and burrow intru- 
sions. Where depth of deposit occurred, records were kept by 
0.5-foot levels. 

Three complete sets of field notes were made, one for the per- 
manent record of Natchez Trace Parkway, one for use of the field 
archeologist, and one for the laboratory archeologist. 



MOUND A 

This mound, 55 feet in diameter and 10 feet high, was selected 
for first operation at the site because little was expected to be 
gained from its excavation except the training of the crew. A 
large and deep cellar in the southern three-fifths of the mound 
seemed to preclude chances of locating an undisturbed central 
feature. After mound A had been stripped of vegetation and 
the cellar cleared to its original dimensions, it was found that the 



central burial feature lay undisturbed only 1.5 feet below the cel- 
lar floor. 

Structure. Evidence showed that mound A fill was laid down 
beginning with village topsoil which formed a 5-foot truncated 
nucleus on which was added cleaner subsoil to complete the 
mound contour. No burials or features were noted in the mound 
fill above the floor feature and no intrusions were found, except 
the cellar which had been dug about 50 years previously and 
abandoned within the last 10 years. 

Features. Feature i consisted of a single log resting longitudi- 
nally north-south on the mound floor near the western periphery. 
Beside the log was an irregularly shaped pit 1.1 feet in depth below 
the mound floor and having a post mold extending through the 
pit bottom, but not the fill, to a depth of 1.4 feet below the pit 
floor. The pit fill was sandy soil slightly darkened by ash and 
charcoal traces. No artifacts or burials were associated. 

Feature 2 was a lenticular charcoal fire pit, maximum thick- 
ness 0.3 foot, diameter 2 feet, on undisturbed sandy-clay mound 
floor beneath the southeast periphery of the mound. No arti- 
facts or bones were associated. The pit was precedent to the 
mound and was evidently inclusive in the same village deposit as 
feature 7, the circular pattern of post molds partly underlying 
mound A. 

Feature 3 designated two horizontal parallel log molds lying 
10 feet apart in the burned floor area of mound A center and 
extending south of this area. These logs, 21.7 feet long by 1.9 
feet in diameter and 21.1 feet long by 1.6 feet in diameter, were 
also burned, and the bark was reduced to charcoal which lay 
intact at the bottom of the mold. Oak was the species indicated. 

Between the parallel logs lay burial 1, extended, accompanied 
by burials 2 and 3, flexed, at head, and burial 4, indeterminate, 
at foot. A small cluster of potsherds lay between burials 1 and 4. 

These logs constituted the only observable structural element 
in the central tomb feature of mound A. Four small vertical post 
molds scattered between the logs lay entirely beneath the tomb 
floor and were sealed off by it, hence were not associated. 

Feature 5, at the floor of mound A, was an irregular patch of 
fire-marked clay, burned deep red, and extending two-thirds the 
length of the parallel logs to the south and 10 feet beyond to the 
north. This clay was probably added deliberately to the depth 
of 0.1 foot on the original soil surface, since the undisturbed old 
topsoil below is an average of 0.6 foot thick as it rests on the basal 
red clay. The burned clay layer, however, shows no evidence of 
puddling. 

Feature 7 was a series of 25 post molds forming a partial cir- 
cular pattern lying beneath the floor of mound A at the northeast 
quadrant and associated with the precedent village soil. Approx- 
imately half of a circular pattern was preserved beneath the mound 
fill; the remaining half originally lay outside the mound and had 
been destroyed by erosion, except for dubious traces. A total of 
18 sand-tempered sherds was recovered from these molds. (See 
sherd analyses by feature.) 

Burials. 

Burial i. A small middle-aged female lay extended on the 
back, head to the north, on the middle portion of a burned floor 



area of mound A between the large horizontal parallel logs of 
feature 3. Evidently the paramount burial of the mound, the 
skeleton was adorned with the only certain grave goods of the 
tomb — a pair of double cymbal-type copper spools on each wrist 
(pi. 12, fig. 3). A small cluster of sand-tempered sherds lay 
approximately 0.6 foot south of the location of the feet on the 
burned floor. The bones of burial 1 were in poor condition and 
the lower leg bones and feet were not preserved. Only the skull, 
radii, and ulnae were sufficiently intact for removal. Associated 
on the same burned floor area between the parallel logs were 
burials 2 and 3, which lay beyond the head to the north. Burial 
4, probably a child, identified only by pieces of tooth enamel, lay 
5 feet south of the feet of burial 1 and outside the burned floor 
area. Burial 1 was not fire-damaged; 2, 3, and 4 were in situ 
cremations. 

Burial 2. This small, lightly flexed adult, probably young, lay 
on the burned floor (feature 5) area of mound A, head to north, 
less than 2 feet north of the head of burial 1. The bones showed 
signs of calcining and were reduced to barely definable traces 
on the hard floor area. No bones were measurable. No grave 
goods were found. 

Burial 3 was a second small, lightly flexed adult, partly en- 
croaching on burial 2 and continuing north, head oriented north, 
and lying on the burned floor area of feature 5 and also within 
the parallel log frame. The heavily calcined bones were almost 
entirely obliterated. No grave goods were associated. 

Burial 4. This burial was inferred mainly by tooth caps and 
scattered enamel, indicating a child with milk teeth. The traces 
were calcined. The tooth caps lay 5 feet south of burial 1 between 
the massive parallel logs but outside the burned floor of feature 5. 
The mound floor here was compacted clay-filled soil below which 
lay the basic undisturbed red clay. 



MOUND B 

This dome-shaped burial mound, 80 feet in diameter and 14 
feet high, indicated by its structure that the original basal diameter 
may have been nearer 60 to 65 feet. Probably the original height 
was considerably greater and the shape more conical. From 10 to 
20 feet of the peripheral area was most likely erosional wash from 
the mound slopes. 

Features. Feature 8, the central feature over which mound B 
was constructed, consisted of an irregular rimmed oval pit, inside 
dimensions 38 by 30 feet, exterior rim 46 by 38 feet, with maxi- 
mum inside depth of 3.8 feet. It was sunk through the original 
topsoil into sterile red clay. A small subpit extended 1.4 feet 
below the primary pit floor and showed evidence of having con- 
tained a very hot fire that burned the walls bright red. 

The primary pit rim was characterized by parallel log molds, 
estimated 0.15- to 0.4-foot diameter, which arched over the rim 
radially. Because no charcoal adhered to the bottom of the casts 
and since the casts were complete, it may be assumed that the logs 
rotted rather than burned. Beneath the western portion of the 
primary pit rim and molds lay a large deposit of charred vegetal 




r ■ ■■■■.■.■•■ ■v//.v\ 

EROSIONAL DRIFT 

W///////J////////M 

\mmtmtm 

ASH AND CLAY 



Is 


^-"^ 


r -~-r--H 




OLD 


TOPSOIL 


1 ' \ 




ASH- 


CHARCOAL 


□H 



remotio 



Cremotion 
Cluster of PomU 



UNDISTURBED FARTM 



Vertical Post Hol« R'm Mold 



Rim Unld u 



12-345 |C 



SCALE IN FEET 



FIGURE 3 



material and potsherds. A smaller deposit was located similarly 
in the northern portion of the rim. 

The floor of the primary pit consisted of a deposit of ashes, 
from o.i to 0.3 foot thick, pure at the bottom and increasingly 
mixed with sandy mound fill above, directly in contact with sterile 
basic red clay. In this ash layer slightly above the sterile clay lay 
three cremations of human bones, dried before burning as indi- 
cated by checking of surfaces, accompanied by an L-shaped row 
of 29 stone celts and a cluster of 9 spear points. A flesh burial 
of an adult, extended on the back, lay near the east rim, not in 
close association with any artifacts. The subpit beneath the pri- 
mary pit floor contained a fourth cremation of dried human bones 
and a second cluster of 8 spear points. This small pit was heavily 
fire-marked. 

Near the west rim were two pairs of copper spools. These two 
pairs were found approximately a foot apart, and each spool of 
each pair was 0.1 foot from its mate. These spools were unasso- 
ciated with any other artifacts or with a burial. Their arrange- 
ment, however, was similar to those in mound A which were 
found on the wrists of burial 1. Though no signs of a burial 
were encountered at this point, it is possible that a flesh burial 
with copper spools on the wrists once lay there. Preservative 
conditions in mound B were much worse than in mound A. 

The four copper spools of mound B were in a more advanced 
state of deterioration than those of mound A, and as the flesh 
burial in mound A had partially disappeared, it is possible that 
the one in mound B had completely disappeared — the only trace 
remaining being the spools left in position as though attached 
to the wrists. 

Settled in the ashes of the primary pit floor were horizontal 
log molds, sometimes indicative of a rectangular framework. 
When the ash layer covering the primary pit floor was completely 
removed, 16 large and deep vertical molds were observed extend- 
ing from the floor level into the basic red clay. At the bottom 
of one of these molds lay a stone celt. The average depth of the 
molds was 2.26 feet below the bottom of the primary pit. The 
oval shape of the pits originally dug to accommodate the posts 
was relevant to their depth, and their average length at the top 
was 2.56 feet, breadth 1.54 feet. A hole considerably larger than 
the actual mold had been dug in order to obtain working room. 
A characteristic aspect of these molds was that the axis of the 
oval outline was east-west and the east wall slanted from the top 
(east) to the bottom (west) and bore the imprint of bark. 

The deep molds beneath the primary pit floor of feature 8 can 
hardly be described without involving interpretation. As a group 
of post molds they are unique at the site in that the logs within 
them made a slanting impression in a uniform direction. If these 
molds supported a structure, the structure must have tipped over 
eastward with the interior upright supporting logs leaning into 
the fill of the slanting post hole. 

What caused this superstructure to sag eastward is unknown, 
but possibly the roofing was too heavy and massive for the sup- 
porting logs. Or, as there are ashes on the pit floor and indica- 
tions that the roofing burned, this partial collapse may have 



occurred at the time the structure began to burn. The support- 
ing logs burned off down to the level of the pit floor, ashes from 
the roofing covered them, and later the remaining portions of the 
logs rotted, leaving the slanting molds below the ash layer. 

The radiating small log molds over the rim could be explained 
as sides of the structure which were shallowly imbedded on the 
outside of the rim and collapsed inward, arching over the rim. 
If the structure burned, however, it is not likely that all of these 
slender logs would have survived to make complete molds. 
Hence, it is probable that the branches were laid or bent over the 
rim to form a pattern as a part of the trimming of the ceremonial 
pit. Thus, laid flat, the branches would have escaped burning 
and would have rotted subsequently, leaving a mold without 
charcoal and ash content, as indicated by observation during the 
uncovering of the mold pattern. 

The deep subpit may have contained fire, possibly for cremation 
purposes, before the structure over the primary pit disappeared 
and the ashes were deposited on the primary pit floor. 

Since none of the artifacts associated with the primary or sub- 
pit shows fire-marking or damage, it must be assumed that the 
secondary deposition of cremated remains and the placement of 
the flesh burial or burials and artifacts took place after the fire 
had completely cooled and the ash layer covered the whole pit 
area. This is in contrast with the burned floor of mound A where 
cremations took place in situ for flexed burials which accompanied 
a paramount extended flesh burial. The discovery of a celt in 
the bottom of a deep post mold beneath the primary pit floor 
indicates the celt was originally part of a cluster of points and 
celts near burial 6 and that one celt slipped down into the hollow 
left by the disintegration — by rotting, since the log would hardly 
burn in the mold. 

The poor condition of the extended flesh burial, No. 5, and 
the complete absence of bones with the two pairs of copper spools 
might be explained by the fact that the rimmed pit of feature 8 
was a natural catch basin for all moisture seeping through the 
mound from the surface in acid soil; hence, the rotting of un- 
burned bone was hastened. The calcined bone, being less subject 
to acid reaction, remained intact. 

The construction of mound B was begun directly after the 
placement of burials and artifacts on the ashes of the main pit, 
and all evidence points to the uninterrupted adding of basket 
loads of earth until the mound was completed. The loads were 
more distinct and varied in material than those of mound A and 
were often composed of red clay subsoil, gray or white sand, and 
mixtures of these. 

Further observations on the evidence observed on the rim and 
in the pit include the locating of a particle of galena on the south- 
west rim of the pit, under the rim log molds, and a pair of spear 
points, one of which lay directly above the top of a deep floor 
mold. Two small bits of shell (Busycon perversum) were located 
on the primary pit floor. 

Concerning the actual mound construction, it may be noted at 
mound B that the loading of the mound fill showed arching over 
the rim and a corresponding dipping of loads toward the pit 



8 



floor. Thus, the loading probably began at the rim, and the 
central pit remained a relative depression until the mound was 
half completed. 

Burials. Burial 5 was the only certain flesh burial located in 
the primary pit floor of feature 8, mound B. Traces of a femur 
and tibia northwest of the skull indicated an extended position 
with head to the southeast. The body, except the head, lay on 
the packed-clay floor of the pit, and the head rested on top of a 
bed of ashes that completely filled a small cup-shaped hollow, 0.9 
foot deep. The skull, femur, and tibia, however, showed no 
traces of burning. No artifacts were associated except for four 
potsherds, all sand tempered, in the ash-filled hollow beneath the 
skull, and these were undoubtedly chance inclusions. 

Burial 6 consisted of cremated bones, highly fragmentary and 
completely calcined, showing small cracks or checking assumed 
to indicate burning when dry (Webb and Snow, 1945, pp. 188- 
189). This cluster was circular, 1.5 feet in diameter, and lay 
in ashes on the packed-clay floor of the primary pit of feature 8. 
This cremation was at the east end of an L-shaped series of pol- 
ished stone celts which terminated with a cluster of nine flaked 
spear points. The cremation lay directly above a large, deep post 
mold extending 2.8 feet below the pit floor and containing a celt 
at the bottom. 

Burial 7. This cremation was represented by a small dense 
cluster of human calcined bone fragments on the floor at the south 
end of the fire pit, extending 1.7 feet below the floor of the primary 
pit of feature 8. As in burial 6, the bones showed checking, as if 
they had been burned after drying. One of the calcined frag- 
ments retained a green stain, probably from oxide of copper. Two 
feet away in the rounded southeast corner of the pit lay a cache 
of eight spear points comparable to the cache of points with 
burial 6. 

Burial 9. The second cremation on the primary pit floor of 
feature 8 was a cluster of calcined bone fragments lying between 
the row of polished stone celts and the southwest rim of the pit. 
Like the other cremation of feature 8, the bone fragments showed 
checking and probably were dry when burned. Although two 
pairs of double cymbal-type copper spools lay at the same level, 
2.5 feet to the southwest, there is no demonstrable association. 
The spools may have accompanied a flesh burial which com- 
pletely disintegrated. 

Burial 10. The third cremation to be found on the primary 
pit floor, was located immediately inside and below the north rim 
of the pit. The calcined bone cluster appeared to have been 
gathered into a circular pile and deposited in a mixture of ashes 
and dirt. The bone fragments had the characteristic checking 
of those which are burned when dry. No artifacts lay in direct 
association with burial 10, and the series of celts and cache of 
spear points near burial 6 were the closest artifacts aside from 
scattered sherd material in the floor ashes and on the pit rim. 



MOUND C 

This mound, a small intact conical structure showing no damage 
other than normal erosion, was left unexcavated. 



MOUND D 

Mound D, diameter 45 feet, height 6 feet, located 1,200 feet 
north of mound B, was the smallest of the three mounds excavated, 
if the small mound remnants E and F are excepted. 

Features. Feature 35. In its interior burial feature mound 
D corresponds to mound B rather than to mound A in that the 
fill was placed over a central primary pit, 10 by 7 feet, this time 
rectangular and 0.3 foot deep, but evidencing at least a partial 
rim overlaid on the west side by a horizontal series of small 
parallel log molds. A single polished-stone celt was the only 
artifact associated with this primary pit floor, if sherds on the 
rim and in the fill directly above the floor are excepted. A circular 
pit, 2.8 feet deep and 5 feet in diameter, was sunk beneath the floor 
of the primary pit into sterile red clay. This pit was filled with 
charcoal and ashes and the clay sides bore marks of intense heat. 
Within the fire pit just below the east rim in fire debris lay traces 
of human tooth caps associated with one copper spool and a bead 
of rolled copper. From 2.5 feet to 4 feet beyond the respective 
corners of the rectangular primary pit were four large post molds 
extending from 3.5 to 3.7 feet below the top of the old sod at the 
mound base. Here the indication of a single canopy mounted 
over the central feature on 4 stout posts set outside the primary 
pit is in contrast with the 16 large posts set in the floor of the 
primary pit of mound B. Like the post-supported structure of 
mound B, however, these four posts evidently were intended to 
support a heavy roof structure which was probably burned. 

Feature 31 was a cluster of sherds located on old sod under 
the peripheral wash zone of mound D and precedent to the 
mound. The sherds are exclusively sand-tempered. These sherds 
are included in the tabulation of mound D as a whole. 

Feature 32 consisted of two associated sherd clusters lying, like 
feature 31, on old sod beneath the peripheral drift area of mound 
D, 1.3 feet below the present sod line. All sherds are sand- 
tempered. 

Feature 34, a shallow pit, oval, 6 by 3.5 feet, measuring only 
0.2 foot interior depth below the old sod, was situated beneath 
the peripheral wash area of mound D. The contents were meager 
and included only charcoal, burned clay, and a few sherds which 
are exclusively sand-tempered. 

Feature 36. A sherd cluster apparently from a single pot of 
sand-tempered type, Baldwin Plam, was deposited on the rim 
of the primary pit of feature 35, mound D, at junction with the 
old sod line. 

Burials. Burial 30. This burial, largely conjectural, based on 
the finding of human tooth enamel fragments in association with 
a copper spool and a bit of rolled copper bent into a crude bead 
was located in the top of the fire pit of feature 35, mound D. 
The tooth traces were unaccompanied by other skeletal evidences 
in the remaining fire debris of this deep subpit, since neither 
calcined nor unburned bone of any kind was noted. Hence, 
the possibility of the inclusion of a cranium alone or even a few 
teeth cannot be denied. There is a possibility of a cremation here, 
the bones of which were removed from the pit for burial else- 
where. 



o o 



O O 3, ° 



O ""FEATURE 23 \_J O 



O O O 



R IA L° 2 I ■*■ O 



/Opli ° .DARK AREA 

o O o 




FEATURE 24 



SCALE IN f EE T 




<b 





MOUND A 



FEATURE 35 



E Copper spool Irmi^, 

Copper beod nnd 
Human tooth cops f-i 5> 




Wrv///A 



L MIKTURE 



EROSiONAL DRIFT 



F~^VT~VT1 0LD 10P30IL 



UNOI S TUR8E EARTH 




DATUM LtvEL 



V////////A •— »■«« l-^-v^ •» 



F— ^1 



ND CHARCOAL 



10 



FIGURE 4 



The over-all purpose of mounds A, B, and D can be compared 
as follows: 

Similarities. All three mounds were erected over burials placed 
on burned areas and amid ashes. All contained copper spools as 
grave offerings and mounds A and B included at least one ex- 
tended flesh burial. The pottery of the fill and features of the 
three mounds is preponderantly sand-tempered fabric and plain. 
Pottery sealed off in precedent formations by each mound is 
exclusively so. 

Similarity of the mound D central feature (No. 35) to the 
central feature of mound B (No. 8) is apparent in the respective 
subpits within primary pits, each subpit evidencing intense heat. 
It is curious here that the body belonging to the tooth caps was 
not cremated, otherwise the calcined bones should have been 
preserved. The almost complete disappearance of unburned bone 
is explainable by the continuous presence of slightly acid moisture 
in the fire pit, which acted as a catch basin for water filtering 
through the mound fill. 

Dissimilarities. Mound A burial floor was a flat burned clay 
area; mound B burials rested on the bottoms of a primary and 
secondary subpit; and the mound D burial traces were in the fill 
of a secondary subpit. Mound A contained four cremations; 
mound B contained four; Mound D, one. Mound A burials were 
not accompanied by stone celts and flaked spear points as were 
the burials of mound B. Mound D subpit burial may not have 
been intentionally associated with the single celt on the primary 
pit floor. 

Dissimilarities in burial customs are more marked between 
mounds D and A than between D and B, the only important 
traits shared by all three being copper spools as grave goods, and 
sand-tempered pottery, plain or fabric-impressed. It is especially 
notable that all pottery in the fill or beneath the fill of mound D 
was exclusively sand-tempered, plain or fabric-impressed. 

An interesting contrast exists in arrangement of deep post molds 
in connection with the submound pit features of mounds D and 
B. In mound D a single canopy was mounted on 4 stout posts 
set outside the primary pit, whereas in mound B, 16 large posts 
were set in the floor of the primary pit and evidently intended to 
support a heavy roof structure which was later burned. 



MOUND E 

Mound E was a small remnant almost obliterated by a county 
road which had been cut through the middle and east portions. 
The location was halfway between mounds B and D. The west 
rim of mound E was sufficiently intact to permit an exploratory 
trench to be dug into what remained of the original fill. On the 
apparent loading bottom, above the undisturbed earth, were traces 
of a darker reddish zone, approximately 0.1 foot thick, which 
increased in distinctness toward the center of the original mound. 
This layer may have corresponded to the floor of mound A. 
No artifact material or bone was found in the exploratory trench. 

Mound E could not have been large, an approximate diameter 
of 50 feet being indicated by the rough arc of the west remnant. 



MOUND F 

This small mound, located at the south end of the site, 50 feet 
southwest of mound C, had been plowed down almost beyond 
recognition in recent years, although local residents recalled a 
definite mound having existed on the spot. Excavation showed 
the mound to have been eroded beneath the assumed tomb feature, 
the present elevation of 1.5 feet representing only a relative dif- 
ference in relation to the surrounding surface. The only cultural 
evidence aside from a few scattered sherds, mostly near the sur- 
face, was a greenstone celt located on the surface. 

Like mound E, mound F must have been small, probably not 
over 50 feet in diameter. 



VILLAGE SITE 

The 7-acre village area identified between mounds A and D 
and extending 700 feet west of this axis can be summarized as 
demonstrating occupation from the prehistoric period of exclu- 
sive sand-tempered pottery through the period of clay-grit tem- 
pered pottery and, with a hiatus, the historic Chickasaw in the 
early nineteenth century. The area of occupation lies on a gently 
rounded ridge between two small branches of Houlka Creek 
where erosion concurrent with row crop farming has removed 
from 2 to 3 feet of the topsoil since the close of the nineteenth 
century. 

As excavation began, it became obvious that post holes of old 
structures once buried under later debris were now partially 
eroded and the subsequent debris had left only a filtering of arti- 
facts on the denuded topsoil. Prehistoric flexed burials in oval 
pits often lay directly in the plow zone. Only peripheral areas 
of the village site which had not been plowed for many years 
yielded historic Chickasaw material which lay on the remains of 
earlier occupation. Thus, stratigraphy at the entire site was dem- 
onstrable only in the cases of the sealing off of village features 
by mound fill, as in mound A, feature 7, and the superimposition 
of Chickasaw burials on the circular patterns of post molds of 
feature 24. Stratigraphy could be inferred from a comparison of 
the artifact content of post molds of circular structure patterns 
in the village, such as features 14, 19, 24, and material from the 
surface to the plow line. Likewise, contents of fire and refuse 
pits in the village could be analyzed by depth. But in these cases 
it was obvious that artifacts, even though sealed in post holes 
beneath the plow line, whatever depth, could never be contempo- 
raneous with the original structures which had to disappear and 
their timbers rot to the bottoms of the molds before the final depo- 
sition of later detritus in the molds and pits took place. It can 
only be inferred that, ii a uniform type of pottery prevails in the 
sealed post molds, that type is closer to the period of the structure 
than the admixture ol other types in the disturbed plow zone. 

Features. The following features were identified with the vil- 
lage occupation area at the Bynum site: (Note that the circular 
patterns of post molds lie consecutively in a southeast-northwest 
axis, except feature 22 and a dubious pattern, feature 20.) 



891131 o— si- 



ll 



Feature 7 designates a 35-foot circle of single post molds par- 
tially sealed off by mound A and yielding sand-tempered Saltillo 
Fabric and Baldwin Plain sherds exclusively. 

Feature 14. This 60-foot circle of post molds was visible at 
the plow line. The mold diameter averaged 0.62 foot; depth 
below plow line averaged 2.28 feet (maximum 4.2 feet, minimum 
0.6 foot). 

Within the circle were apparently scattered molds, perhaps be- 
longing to roof supports or partitions within the structures. The 
entrance was uncertain, possibly to the northeast, with a baffle 
screen inside. A mold 2.9 feet deep marked the center of the 
circle. Near the north perimeter one shallow fire-marked pit 
basin 2 feet in diameter and a shallow pit 3 feet in diameter, con- 
taining burned clay and charcoal but not fire marked at the 
edges, constituted the only interior features other than molds. 
The contents of the circle molds showed sand-tempered pottery 
increasing with depth until it was exclusive at the 3- to 4-foot 
level. The greatest percentage of clay-grit sherds occurred in the 
first foot at the top of the molds. 

Feature 16. This 5- by 3-foot ovoid refuse pit at N. 2062, 
E. 1468, unassociated with any other feature or burial, had a 
depth of 2 feet below the sod line. A distinguishing characteris- 
tic was a cluster of red chert chips 0.8 foot in diameter and ex- 
tending from the plow line to 0.1 foot below. Sherds found in the 
pit totaled 116 and were all sand-tempered except one, which was 
limestone-tempered. Unfortunately, the depth at which this lime- 
stone-tempered sherd was found was omitted by the workman. 

It is indicated that this pit was filled during times when sand 
temper was prevalent. One Marksville stamped sherd suggests 
the pit was filled just prior to clay-grit tempering use and is con- 
temporaneous with feature 20 (p. 25). 

Feature 17. Like feature 16, this ovoid refuse pit, located at 
N. 2040, E. 1460, was not associated with any other feature or 
burial. The ash and charcoal debris contained sherds and animal 
bones. The predominance of sand-tempered ware is notable 
here, and the probability is that the pit was filled toward the end 
of the sand temper period and before the introduction of cord- 
marking. A record of types by depth in four levels to 2.4 feet 
is shown on page 25. Identification of species represented by the 
bones is on page 49. 

Feature 19 was a 56-foot circle of post molds visible at the 
plow line, average diameter of molds 0.77 foot, average depth 
2.06 feet (maximum 4.6 feet, minimum 0.5 foot). This circular 
pattern is virtually a duplicate of feature 14 except that no fire 
pits nor basins were observed. The entrance, not definitely indi- 
cated, could have been to the northwest or southeast. No draft- 
baffle screening, indicated by post molds inside possible doorways, 
is apparent. The mold contents similarly were predominantly 
sand-tempered sherds with a small number of Furrs Cordmarked 
and Tishomingo Plain. The Tishomingo Cordmarked occurs 
only in the first foot. Only three limestone sherds were found 
in the molds and these in the two upper levels. 

Feature 20. The identity of a circular pattern of post molds 
here is uncertain. If the indication of a pattern is valid, the 
pattern is incomplete due to gully erosion and the disturbance 



by tree roots. The chief significance here is the fact that sherds 
constituting a third of a Marksville Stamped, Rim Incised, Vari- 
ant, pot were located in the southeast sector under 1.5 feet 
of soil wash and in the top of a probable post mold. The pot 
could have been an accidental intrusion. It is also interesting 
to note that in uncovering this pattern 27 sherds were recorded, 
all of which were sand-tempered, indicating that this area was 
used mainly by makers of sand-tempered pottery. 

Feature 21. The largest of the Bynum post mold patterns 
was irregular, slightly oval, and had a mean diameter of 78 feet. 
An erosional gully which had cut a segment of the northwest 
portion, and a stand of trees on the entire pattern, made identifica- 
tion of the pattern time consuming and difficult. Since most of 
the molds were shallow, it was not thought worth while to ex- 
cavate each mold. There can be little doubt that this feature is 
closely related to features 14 and 19. Of two shallow oval pits 
inside the circle one showed fire marking. The fact that the fire 
pit and the shallow excavation of 0.3 to 0.6 foot below the surface 
yielded 65 sand-tempered sherds and only 3 clay-grit out of 68 
total shows the area to have been occupied chiefly by potters 
using sand temper. 

Feature 22. This feature is not included in the northwest- 
southeast axis series represented by features 7, 24, 14, 19, and 21 
because it lies further north along the Parkway center line from 
feature 21 and differs in type. Feature 22 is a smaller circle, 
15 feet in diameter, consisting of single molds 0.3 to 0.4 foot in 
diameter and spaced less than a foot apart. The molds were a 
uniform 0.5 foot in depth and contained only a single sherd of 
Baldwin Plain. The interior of the structure had only one 
center mold and a small shallow fire pit directly adjacent to the 
mold. 

The seven sherds associated with the interior of this feature 
and not in the molds are not diagnostic and represent both clay- 
grit and sand tempers. 

Feature 23. This refuse pit extending from the plow line to 
2.1 feet, containing village soil admixed with charcoal and ash, 
was located at N. 2075, E. 1410, 2 feet west of burial 16. Large 
quantities of animal bone refuse, gastropod shells, chert chips, 
and sherds were recovered. It seems evident that this pit was 
dug during the predominance of clay-grit pottery into and through 
a soil zone of sand-tempered sherds. Heavy concentration of 
Tishomingo Cordmarked in the lower levels indicates this. The 
plow zone intermingled refuse shows Tishomingo Cordmarked 
and Furrs Cordmarked. Although the sherds in the fill of 
burial 16, nearby, are few, they tend to place this burial and 
feature 23 in the same horizon. (See analysis, pp. 29 and 27.) 

Feature 24. At a distance of 100 feet northwest of mound A 
three circular or ovoid patterns of post molds encroaching closely 
upon each other had superimposed directly upon them the burials 
and possibly the pits of historic Chickasaws. (See fig. 4.) 

The post mold patterns, designated A, B, and C, had the fol- 
lowing dimensions: 

Circle A, innermost pattern, ovoid, average diameter 57 feet, 



12 



°0 O 0°°° °°o ° o Q 






O o 

o 



O 



O V'."' 



o O 



o 



oo 



o O 

o 

o 



°°°° 



o „ »o l 



FEATURE 19 



FEATURE 14 




O 



F EATURE 22 



SCAL E I N rttT 




Vo • \ 



Q 



x 



£? 



o o 

o o 



FEATURE 20 



o o 

o o 



° o 

° <.°0 



. o <^° 



FIGURE 5 



FEATURE 2 1 



13 



average post mold depth from old plow line 1.33 feet (maximum 
1.7 feet, minimum 0.3 foot), average mold diameter 0.65 foot. 

Circle B, circular, 61-foot diameter, encroaching on circle C, 
average post mold depth from old plow line 1.80 feet (maximum 
4.1 feet, minimum 0.5 foot), average mold diameter 0.87 foot. 

Circle C, 60-foot diameter, average post mold depth from plow 
line 1.54 feet (maximum 2.1 feet, minimum 0.5 foot), average 
mold diameter 0.66 foot. 

Of several refuse pits within or encroaching upon these three 
patterns it was impossible to be sure which were associated with 
any of the three circles or with the superimposed historic Chicka- 
saw occupation. However, it may be assumed in one case, that 
of the large rectangular pit within pattern A, labeled feature 26, 
that this shallow refuse basin was probably associated with his- 
toric burial 25, the child accompanied by over 1,300 glass beads 
and other grave goods. 

None of the post molds of patterns A, B, or C intruded upon 
the historic burials. On the other hand, post molds presumably 
associated with these patterns were disturbed by the superimposi- 
tion of burials 17, 21, 22, 25 and two pits, features 25 and 26. 

As in the case of features 7, 14, and 19, the post molds of circles 
A, B, and C were perpendicular and single, the entrances not 
clearly indicated. 

Analysis of the contents of the three circle patterns revealed 
no significant difference between the circles in cultural evidence. 
Taken together, the sherds show a predominance of sand-tem- 
pered wares in the post molds, where only one Tishomingo plain 
was recorded. 

The historic burials superimposed upon the feature 24 area are 
treated under burials 17, 21, 22, 25, and feature 26. 

Feature 25. Situated between circles B and C of feature 24 
(fig. 4), this eccentrically shaped pit, i-foot interior depth, top 
even with plow line, offered no concrete evidence as to its asso- 
ciation with either prehistoric or historic occupation in the post 
mold pattern and grave area. No reason is evident for the irregu- 
lar oudine similar to feature 25 in the southeast sector of circles B 
and C of feature 24. The contents of feature 25 pit consisted 
chiefly of small mammal and bird bones, tortoise plastrons, some 
traces of burned reed, and sherds. 

Feature 26, a rectangular pit, 10 by 7 feet, i-foot interior depth, 
top cut by plow line, was located within the circle A pattern of 
feature 24. Primarily a fire or refuse basin, this pit contained at 
the northeast end a deposit of terrapin carapace and plastron frag- 
ments, a deer jaw, and miscellaneous detritus including sherds 
evenly divided between clay-grit and sand temper. At the oppo- 
site end of the pit on the pit floor was deposited burial 25, the 
historic Chickasaw child with quantities of trade beads, cup, 
spoon, etc. Probably this pit was historic and contained refuse 
from early and late village occupancy. 

Feature 27, a subrectangular fire pit, measuring 5 by 3 feet and 
with 0.06 foot interior depth below the intrusive plow line, was 
located at N. 2075, E. 1686, unassociated with any other features 
or burials. This feature had two interesting aspects, a series of 
parallel burned logs partly intact and a paucity of artifact ma- 
terial, totaling nine sherds all sand-tempered. It is probable that 



this pit is representative of the early occupancy of the village 
since sherd analysis places it in the sand-tempered, fabric-marked 
horizon. (See analysis, p. 28.) 

Feature 28. Located at N. 2041, E. 1495, this feature was a 
small round refuse pit, diameter 2 feet, depth 2 feet, containing 
only sherds, several from a single pot and a few chert chips. The 
sherds are exclusively sand-tempered, plain or fabric-marked; 
hence, the pit is associated with the early occupation of the site. 
(See analysis, p. 28.) No other features or burials were asso- 
ciated. 

Feature 29. This irregular 10- by 4-foot oblong refuse pit at 
N. 2180, E. 1605, graduated in depth from 4.7 feet below the 
plow line at the west end to 0.5 foot below plow line at the east 
end. The shape of this pit suggests the deep molds of mound B, 
feature 8 pit bottom. 

Although the pit could not be associated with a post mold pat- 
tern, it is possible that a single large post was set up in the deep 
excavation at the west end of the pit. No bark impression traces 
were noted, however, and the general content of the pit suggested 
general village soil fill with a few bits of charcoal and sherd refuse 
intermingled. Of the sherds the predominant type is Baldwin 
Plain, with Furrs Cordmarked second. The topmost level shows 
Tishomingo Plain and Tishomingo Cordmarked. Probably the 
pit was constructed and used during the Furrs Cordmarked pe- 
riod, possibly extending into the clay-grit Tishomingo period. 

Feature 30 was a 5- by 3-foot refuse pit located at N. 2155, 
E. 1547, 0.9 foot deep below plow line, with no suggested stratig- 
raphy. The contents were mainly sherds, both Furrs and Tisho- 
mingo Cordmarked, including a small portion of a single pot. 

Feature 33. While not directly connected with mound B, this 
circular 7 foot diameter refuse pit lay only 10 feet southwest of 
the mound periphery from the present sod line to 1.2 feet below. 
Many sherds were found in the pit fill, the predominant types 
being sand-tempered Baldwin Plain and Fabric Impressed. Tisho- 
mingo Plain is in the minority with Houlka Gray. 

The presence of lumps of pottery clay may indicate pot firing 
was done here, although the pit sides were not fire-marked. 

Feature 37. This pit, 25 feet northwest of mound A, was 1 1 
by 6 feet, 3.5 feet interior depth below sod line, with vertical sides 
and flat bottom. No artifacts other than a few shreds were noted 
in the fill, which was mainly village soil with bits of charcoal 
intermingled. 

Burials. Burial 8 was located at N. 2158, E. 1556, in an area of 
scattered post molds, lying directly in the plow line and destroyed 
except for a fragment of the skull from which the vault was miss- 
ing. The fragments indicate an adult. Although a pit is not 
defined, it may be assumed that the burial once occupied an oval 
pit typical of the village site and was probably flexed. 

Burial ii, situated at N. 2064, E. 1431, was one of a loose 
cluster including five other burials, Nos. 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16, 
all located east of feature 14 and north of feature 19 post mold 
circles and characterized by oval pits, flexed position with heads 
to the east with the exception of No. 16. Burial 1 1 was subadult, 
female, flexed, on left side, disturbed by the plow in a shallow 
pit. The right half of the cranial vault had been sheared away. 



u 



No inclusive grave goods were noted. All remaining bones were 
badly decayed. 

Burials 12, 13, and 14. All of these burials were associated in 
proximity and in almost identical aspects. Each was tightly flexed 
in a shallow oval pit disrupted by the plow line; the bones of each, 
fragmentary and greatly decayed, were apparently adult and 
small, head to the east. No artifacts were associated with the 
burials. 

Burial 15, at N. 2049, E. 1426, like its neighbors described 
above, was extremely fragmentary and decayed, only enough of 
the outline being preserved to indicate a small individual tightly 
flexed in an oval pit, with head to the east. The tooth caps, scat- 
tered by the plow, were recognized as milk teeth. 

Burial 16 was a flexed, young adult male in an oval pit. The 
body lay on its right side but with head to the northwest, con- 
trary to the evident custom of head to east. The pit, at N. 2075, 
E. 14 17, lay only 2 feet east of feature 23. This burial was less 
disturbed by the plow than the preceding five and was removed 
en bloc in a cast. No inclusive grave goods were noted. Sherds, 
probably accidentally included, indicated this burial was of the 
clay-grit period. 

Burial 17 was an historic Chickasaw child burial instrusive 
upon the top 0.5 foot of circle C post molds of feature 24, 1 foot 
below the surface. Although the grave was not completely observ- 
able, indications were that it had been rectangular. The head 
lay toward the east. The bone fragments were extremely decom- 
posed. Numerous trade beads lay in the head and chest area in 
association with a ferrous metal cup and a silver spoon. Flakes 
of bright red paint were located in the facial area. 

Arthur Woodward, curator, Los Angeles County Museum, has 
made the following comments on this burial. 

This would seem to be sometime in the i82o's-i83o's, possibly middle 
1830's, judging by the spoon and the beads. Exact date is impossible. The 
spoon doesn't correspond to any known type because of the peculiar fluting 
or ridging on the handle. The bowl is typically nineteenth century, however. 
The beads are of the common varieties of the period ranging on into the 
1860's for some of them. The small, dark red faceted bead is the one which 
I believe was sold by the traders during the first three decades at least as 
"mock garnet." The other faceted beads are of the cut type of the first half 
of the nineteenth century. At an earlier period, early eighteenth and seven- 
teenth centuries, the faceted beads were molded, and later, in the early 
twentieth they were machine molded or pressed. 

Burial 18. This was the most spectacular of the historic 
Chickasaw burials (pi. 12, fig. 2), a middle-aged male buried 
lightly flexed on the right side, head east, in a 4 by 2-foot rec- 
tangular grave immediately below the old plow line at N. 2213, 
E. 1 153, the west border of the site. Burial 19 lay 7 feet to the 
north. The skeleton was normal and incomplete only in that 
the right hand was missing from the wrist down. 

Undoubtedly this individual was a man of prominence. He 
was adorned with a crown of silver alloy on his head, the salts of 
which had preserved bits of cloth beneath the metal at the back 
of the head (pi. 6, fig. 2). To the right of the head 0.3 foot 
away lay a ferrous metal tomahawk pipe (pi. 14, fig. 16). A 
sawed-oflf rifle barrel lay along the left forearm, and the lock 
mechanism and some knife parts (pi. 14, figs. 11, 13, and 14) 



lay along the right forearm. Earrings and pendants attached lay 
at the sides of the head (pi. 14, figs. 2, 3, 4, and 5). A shell gorget 
showing no design lay on the neck at the chin and was partly 
overlaid by a "tincup" of conventional thin sheet iron (pi. 6, 
figs. 1 and 4). A few beads and a brooch (pi. 6, fig. 7; pi. 14, 
fig. 7) lay on the neck. Scattered in the thoracic area were a flint 
for the rifle, a fragment of an iron key, an unfired lead ball, 
a flattened lead ball, a small thin piece of copper, parts of a three- 
sided file or rasp, and a "medicine bundle" consisting of a cluster 
of one small ground sliver of soapstone, one smooth slate honing 
stone, one small undefinable iron fragment, and one small steel 
spring. 

No definite pattern was observable in the post molds scattered 
about the grave nor did the grave seem to intrude on the molds. 

The comments of Arthur Woodward follow: 

The silver crown was a common head ornament used by the southern 
Indians during the i82o's-i83o's. The shell gorget is probably of conch 
shell from the Bahamas and was probably made at Pascack, N. J., in the 
Campbell Bros, wampum factory . . . The silver "buckle" is in reality 
a silver double heart (crowned) brooch. This is a northern form and is 
more commonly found among the Iroquois and the Delaware although at 
this period, i82o's-i83o's, it seems to have reached south occasionally and 
even into the Osage country. It is sometimes termed the Luckenbooth 
brooch. It is an Old World symbol and represents the Fifth Wound of Christ. 
This particular brooch has been broken and then rather crudely mended. 
There may have been a silversmith's mark on the upper portion which was 
broken off. Robert Cruickshank of Montreal made a great number of these 
brooches (1774-1808). 

The portion of a "key" or "corkscrew" is in all likeliness part of the 
screw of a cock of a flintlock pistol which may well have been of French or 
Spanish origin, late eighteenth or nineteenth centuries. 

The black gunflint came from the Brandon quarries in England. It was 
used in a common trade musket . . . 

The tomahawk pipe . . . fits into the period with the other items. 

Burial 19, a young female adult, lay 1.6 feet below the plow 
line in a rectangular grave at N. 2222, E. 1158, flanked by burial 

18, 7 feet to the south, and burial 20, 2 feet to the north. The 
position of the body was unique at Bynum, having been placed 
on the back, lightly flexed in a rectangular 3.5- by 1.7-foot area, 
with the knees drawn up to where they touched the plow line. 
The head was toward the east. 

The only artifact association was a small strand of glass trade 
beads around the neck, stated by Woodward to be of a type com- 
mon for the period 1820-40. 

Burial 20, the northernmost burial in the series of burials 18, 

19, and 20, lay at N. 2225, E. 1158, pardy exposed to the plow 
line and poorly preserved, head to east. The total depth of the 
existing rectangular 3.7- by 1.9-foot grave was only 0.5 foot below 
the plow line. As typed by Dr. Newman, this was the burial 
of a middle-aged female. Flexing was light, with the body lying 
on the right side. A silver spoon and iron cup were located in 
the upper chest area and a small strand of glass beads lay at the 
neck in a manner similar to burial 19 beads. No other artifacts 
were associated. 

Burial 21 was a historic Chickasaw grave at N. 1858, E. 1585, 
intrusive on circle C of feature 24 post molds, rectangular, 4.5 by 
3 feet, lightly flexed, a middle-aged adult, probably female, head 



15 



cast, extending through the plow line only o.i foot and badly dis- 
turbed. The grave was slightly intrusive on the tops of circle C 
post molds of feature 24. No post molds intruded on the grave. 
Glass beads in great numbers lay in the presumed chest area with 
two copper bells and an iron nail. 
Woodward states: 

Beads of this burial seem a trifle earlier, say in the late eighteenth century. 
The bronze bells might also tally with this period, although these bells are 
found all during the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. 

Burial 22, located at N. 1845, E. 1592, was an historic Chick- 
asaw burial in a rectangular 3.4- by 1.8-foot grave only 0.1 foot 
below the intrusive plow line, but less disturbed than burial 21 due 
to extreme flattening. The grave intruded upon some circle A 
post molds of feature 24. The skull, however, was badly dam- 
aged. The bones possibly represented a male adult lying lightly 
flexed on the right side, head east (pi. 12, fig. 1). 

Artifacts associated with the burial were undamaged and com- 
prised a silver crescent on the chest (pi. 14, fig. 19), cloth traces 
intact beneath the crescent, glass beads about the neck, and copper 
earrings, described by Woodward as follows: 

The silver gorget is not an official issue; hence it was in all likeliness ob- 
tained as a trade item, or possibly as an annuity gift. It has no decoration on 
it that smacks of the work of Cruickshank but, again, no mark; hence I 
cannot say definitely. The period is around the 1820's. 

Burial 23. A superficial oval pit burial at N. 2091, E. 1703, 
unassociated with any feature in the village site, the flexed skeleton 
lay from the plow line to 0.4 foot below with the left side of the 
cranial vault destroyed by the plow. The bones indicate a male 
adult, lying with head to the northeast. Inclusions of fresh-water 
modern pelecypod and gastropod shells show no use as ornaments 
or evidence that they were intentionally placed in the grave (pi. 
12, fig. 4). 

Burials 24 and 26. These two burials lay in a refuse pit 5 feet 
in diameter and extending from the plow line to 0.6 foot below at 
N. 2125, E. 1702. Burial 24 was a tightly flexed flesh or possibly a 
bundle burial lying on the right side disturbed by the plow and 
distorted possibly by disturbance in aboriginal days. All long 
bones were broken repeatedly and portions were crushed, possibly 
by the weight of farm machinery. The skull vault was cut in half 
by the plow but the tooth caps indicated an adult. 

No evidence suggested deliberate inclusion of shells as grave 
goods, although clusters of gastropod fresh-water shells were ob- 
served on both burials as well as in the rest of the refuse fill. . Some 
pelecypod shells were also included. Only one was worked, al- 
though most of the gastropod shells were broken at the top of the 
whorl so that they could have been strung. The bead, the only 
shell ornament recovered from the prehistoric horizon, is of the 
species Pluerocera oborata and was brought into the Bynum area 
from Kentucky, Tennessee, or northern Alabama. 

Burial 26 was a child in the same refuse pit lying tightly flexed 



in an almost upright position with the vault sheared in half by 
the plow at the pit rim. This body was likewise badly broken 
and could either have been disturbed in aboriginal days or placed 
as a bundle burial, or both. These burials were late according to 
sherd analysis (p. 29). 

Burial 25 was superimposed upon the common center of the 
three post mold patterns of feature 24 at N. 1836, E. 1585. It was 
a Chickasaw child burial in the southeast end of the shallow rec- 
tangular basin of feature 26 which intruded upon several post 
molds. 

Although the skeletal portions of burial 25 were decayed beyond 
recovery, the tooth caps identifying the child and the wealth of 
artifacts adorning the body were intact. The position of the head 
was to the southeast. A 22-foot strand consisting of 1,300 glass 
beads lay on the chest with a china cup and pewter spoon at the 
chin. Five copper bells, a snuffbox, and two copper earrings and 
a lead button, marked "A. Matthews," made up the grave inclu- 
sions certain to have been deliberate. A flaked arrow point, a lead 
ball, and some fresh-water shells may have been in the fill of 
feature 26, lying over the burial. 

Woodward comments on the historic grave goods: 

The lead button by A. Matthews is probably English manufacture around 
the 1820's or 1830's . . . The small porcelain bowl is also of the 1830's. 
It is probably of English manfacture. 

The beads are lumped with the other beads of the Chickasaw 
burials at Bynum as being common types for the 1820's through 
i83o's. 

Burial 27 was an adult in an oval pit at N. 2204, E. 1590, sex 
indeterminate, tighdy flexed, on the right side, and unaccompanied 
by grave goods. The burial, being 1.0 foot below the plow line, 
was undisturbed and in fair condition. In the pit fill were noted 
sherds of Baldwin plain, Furrs, and Tishomingo cordmarked, 
with the last-named type dominant. 

Burials 28 and 29 were two cremations lying 8 feet from each 
other and between 25 and 30 feet northwest of the periphery of 
mound B at N. 1842, E. 1687. Whether or not these cremations 
should be associated with the village site or with the cremations 
of mound B, feature 8 pit, which appear identical in type, is un- 
certain. Both cremations lay close to the present sod line and were 
discovered in scraping operations with slips to gather fill for 
reconstructing mound B. Burial 28 was 0.4 foot below the pres- 
ent sod line and burial 29 was 0.2 foot below. Neither had been 
disturbed, showed evidence of inclusion in a fire pit or burned 
area, or yielded traces of artifacts. 

In the absence of conclusive evidence, it is useless to suggest 
these cremations might have been laid down at the time feature 
8 of mound B was being furnished as a tomb, but possibility of 
a connection exists, particularly in the absence of any human 
cremation evidence in the remainder of the considerable village 
area tested. 



16 



Ceramic Analysis 



The Bynum excavation yielded a total of 13,729 sherds. Anal- 
ysis of this material showed that the vast majority was either plain, 
fabric-impressed, or cordmarked. A small number of sherds 
(listed under minority wares below) are indicative of trade with 
other areas. Paste, temper, and composition of the majority sherds 
are similar to material recovered by Dr. Jesse D. Jennings in his 
Lee County excavations. With one exception (Houlka Gray) 
his types and these at Bynum as applied to the majority wares, 
are the same, and his type descriptions have been used as a 
guide in typing and describing the pottery from the Bynum 
excavations (Jennings, 1941, pp. 199-201). Variations in types 
from Jennings' nearby Lee County material were not sufficient 
to warrant setting up new types for the Bynum material. Minor 
differences between the Bynum sherds and Jennings' material in 
composition and form are mentioned under the discussion of 
each type. 

The following tabulation contains the types, totals, and corres- 
ponding percentages for all the pottery of Bynum. Break-down 
figures for each feature and mound are given in the text. Not 
one single complete pottery vessel was recovered from the excava- 
tions. Several groups of sherds, however, when restored, made 
large enough portions of whole vessels so that the original could 
be easily surmised. Except for these few reconstructions, vessel 
forms are postulated on the basis of rim sherds. 

Total number sherds and percentages, Bynum site 



Types 



Baldwin Plain 

Saltillo Fabric Impressed 

Furrs Cordmarked 

Tishomingo Cordmarked 

Tishomingo Plain 

Houlka Gray 

Marksvillc Stamped 

Marksvillc Incised 

Limestone Tempered 
Single Cord Impressed . 

Alexander Incised 

Miscellaneous 

Total 



13, 729 



Number 


Percent- 
ages 


5,789 


42.17 


3,509 


25.56 


1,191 


8.67 


1,446 


10.53 


1,319 


9.61 


383 


2.79 


25 


.18 


1 


.01 


17 


.12 


11 


.08 


8 


.06 


30 


.22 



100.00 



TYPE DESCRIPTIONS 

Baldwin Plain, the type with the greatest percentage of occur- 
rence (42.17 percent) is a sand-tempered, gritty, friable ware, 
ranging in color from gray through dull browns into tans and 
dark reds. Surface finish is generally smoothed, though many 
sherds, because of deterioration in the ground, are now rough 
surfaced. Occasional pieces have thick crude sand particles, 1 to 
2 millimeters in diameter, and in most of the sherds the tem- 
pering material is readily prominent to the naked eye. A few 
sherds which are evenly tempered with a fine-grained sand are 
compact, well-fired, and burnished, but the majority are gritty 
and friable. Burned clay pellets in the paste are completely 
lacking. 

Vessel shapes as indicated by rim sherds are more numerous 
in Baldwin Plain than in the other types from Bynum. A deep 
bowl with an everted rim that meets the vessel wall at right angles 
is fairly common, especially from the village area (table 2, "Fre- 
quency and occurrence of right angle everted rims, Baldwin 
Plain"). Plate 1, figures 1-13, inclusive, 20, 23, 25, and 31, 
show examples of this type rim and rim cross sections. A deep 
narrow-mouthed bowl with generally thin lip and inverted rim 
is also common (pi. 1, figs. 14, 15, 17, 18, 26, 32, and table 3). 
This narrow-mouthed form is also common from the large cir- 
cular post mold patterns of the village area. 

A third vessel shape is that of a bowl in which the sides curve 
upward to the rim and form a straight edge (pi. 2, figs. 6, 7, 8, 
9, 15, 22, 23, and table 4). One rim form shows an incurved 
bowl of shallow depth (pi. 2, fig. 21). A fourth common variety 
of bowl is a form in which the neck may be constricted slightly 
but more often is open with the rim slightly everted and flaring, 
usually about 45 to the vessel wall (pi. 2, figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 
11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, and pi. 1, figs. 22, 27, 28, 30, and 
table 5). One bowl fragment with slightly flaring rim shows 
the lip was gently crennelated (pi. 2 fig. 24). 

No handles, lugs, or appendages are noted for the material 
of this type (Baldwin Plain) from the Bynum site, but eight 
sherds show marked distinction from the above forms. Four 
rim sherds show that an extra strip of clay was added to the rim 
and extends down the outside of the vessel from the lip for a 
distance of one-half to two-thirds of an inch (pi. 1, figs. 29, 30, 
and table 6). One rim piece has a depression on the interior near 
the lip about the size of a thumb which causes the exterior to 
bulge correspondingly. The surface of the bulge is broken in 
such a way as to suggest that originally an appendage may have 



17 



been attached at this point (pi. i, fig. 16). The sixth piece is a 
curved, rounded sherd that, if originally appended at right angles 
to a vessel, could have served as a lip or flat handle (pi. i, fig. 19). 

Two slighdy everted rims which show punctations on the in- 
terior also have a single cord impression just below the rim on 
the exterior. One of these sherds (pi. 1, fig. 28) has a row of 
punctations both on the interior and the exterior. On the exterior 
the punctations have an impression of a single strand of twisted 
cord just below the punctations running parallel to the lip of the 
sherd. Below this first cord impression and at a slight oblique to 
it is a second and below that a trace of a third. The other sherd 
(pi. i, fig. 27) has a single-cord impression just below the rim 
(about one-quarter inch) below which are faint oblique rows of 
punctations. This latter sherd came from feature 19, the former 
was from the plow zone of the village area. 

Jennings notes that occasionally lines of punctations occur 
around the exterior of the rim in the Baldwin plain sherds (1941, 
p. 200). The material from Bynum is similar in this respect also. 
Twenty-five rim sherds show punctations (pi. 1, figs. 21, 23, 25, 
26, 27, 28, and pi. 2, figs. 13, 17, 20, also table 7). The majority 
of these impressions have been made with a single cord-wrapped 
stick, and two were made with a small hollow reed (pi. 1, fig. 26). 
The Bynum material differs from Jennings' Lee County material 
in that the Bynum sherds show the majority of the punctations on 
the interior surfaces, especially in those sherds of everted rim 
bowls (pi. 1, figs. 21, 23, and 25), though some flaring rim jugs 
have punctations only on the inside (pi. 2, figs. 13, 17, and 20). 
On sherds of the right angle everted rim bowls the punctations 
are on the upper surface of the everted rim, usually close to the 
lip (pi. 1, fig. 21). One unusual sherd has a line of punctations 
close to junction edge of the vessel wall and the rim on the upper 
surface of the everted rim, and a second row of similar punctations 
is found on the interior of the vessel wall just below the same 
junction (pi. 1, fig. 23). One right angle everted rim sherd has 
a row of simple incisions on the edge of the rim and wall juncture 
on the interior (pi. 1, fig. 25). 

As used by Jennings, this type — Baldwin Plain — was the com- 
panion type to his decorated ware, Furrs Cordmarked, another 
sand-tempered type. He had no companion type for his Saltillo 
Fabric. In the classification of the material from Bynum many 
sherds bearing a great similarity to Saltillo Fabric but lacking the 
decoration are also classified as Baldwin Plain. Thus at Bynum 
the type Baldwin Plain serves a double duty, that of being the 
plain counterpart to both Furrs Cordmarked and Saltillo Fabric. 
Both these latter types are sand-tempered and quite similar to each 
other in paste, texture, and color, so that undecorated portions of 
these vessels might be indistinguishable. Those sherds of Bald- 
win Plain which bear the greatest similarities to Saltillo Fabric are 
found in the same areas with Saltillo Fabric and, similarly, those 
which bear closer relations to Furrs Cordmarked were recovered 
in areas also yielding Furrs Cordmarked material. That still 
leaves a considerable group of sand-tempered sherds classified as 
Baldwin Plain. For that reason, all plain sand-tempered sherds 
from Bynum are considered as Baldwin Plain. 

Saltillo Fabric Impressed (pi. 8, figs. 1-8, inclusive), the second 



most frequent pottery type from Bynum, like the Baldwin Plain, 
is a sand-tempered ware. Jennings found occasional charcoal 
fragments and rare clay pellets in his Saltillo Fabric, but the sherds 
from Bynum are all pure sand temper (1941, p. 201). Texture is 
fine, compact, and undefined, very hard and gritty to the touch. 
It is possible to rub off grains of sand with the fingertips. The 
predominant color is a dark red or reddish brown of a dull hue. 
Interiors are smoothed, and often the smoothing striations still 
show, especially near the rim. 

Exterior decoration was made by imprinting a plain plaited or 
plain twined textile or basket design into the soft clay before fir- 
ing. The impressions may be either parallel to, perpendicular to, 
or diagonal to the rim. Sometimes, after the impression was made, 
the surface was again smoothed over, so that the fabric marks are 
almost obliterated (pi. 8, fig. 8). In other cases use and general 
deterioration in the ground cause the impressions today to be 
blotched or faint. 

Vessel forms are simple, the commonest being a deep jar with 
slightly constricted neck and flaring everted rim (pi. 3, figs. 1-6, 
inclusive, and table 8). A second type shown by rim sherds is an 
open bowl form with either straight or slightly flaring rim (pi. 
3, figs. 8-15, inclusive, table 9). Two rim sherds indicate a jug 
form with straight collar (pi. 3, fig. 16). Seven rim sherds were 
of a miscellaneous type (table 10). Five of these show the addi- 
tion of an extra layer of clay, extending from the lip one-half to 
two-thirds of an inch down the outside of the vessel. In three 
cases the textile impression extends up under this extra rim fold, 
showing that the strip of clay was added after the original decora- 
tion on the body of the vessel was accomplished (pi. 3, figs. 19 and 
20). Then this extra layer was likewise fabric-impressed. One 
coarse sand-tempered sherd from the old sod beneath mound D 
shows a crude, poorly executed right angle everted rim (pi. 3, fig. 
17). Except for this rather abortive example, the right angle 
everted rim so common in Baldwin Plain is completely lacking 
among sherds decorated with the textile or basket impression. 
One sherd with a faint basket impression shows an unusual rim 
shape (pi. 3, fig. 18) in that a 2-inch portion of the rim is raised 
a half-inch higher and is more flaring than the rest of the rim. 
No handle, lugs, or base supports are noted. 

Saltillo Fabric Impressed sherds from Bynum, while called 
"fabric impressed" following Jennings' report of 1941, actually 
show an imprint that is much more likely to be the imprint of 
a basket than a true textile. A few sherds (pi. 8, figs. 1 and 2) 
show a thin woof applied to a warp that closely approximates the 
spacing in the coarser specimens. The vast majority of the sherds, 
however, show an imprint which is thick and rounded and was 
made by a matting of twined vegetal fibers rather than by a cloth 
or fabric of twined string. 

Furrs cordmarked (pi. 3, figs. 21-28, inclusive; pi. 8, figs. 
9-12, inclusive; and pi. 9, figs. 1-4, inclusive), like the two pre- 
vious types, is also a sand-tempered ware. The tempering mate- 
rial is fine to very fine with frequent mica flecks readily visible. 
Texture is fine, homogeneous, with the temper evenly distributed, 
and like the other sand-tempered wares it has a gritty sandy feel 
and is friable to the touch. Interior colors are black, gray, and 



18 



brown, grading into reddish browns. Exterior colors range from 
light gray through tan, red-brown into dull browns. The inte- 
riors are smoothed and the exteriors were decorated with a cord 
impression made by paddling the surface with an instrument 
wrapped in twined string. Most string widths are i to 2 milli- 
meters though some impressions of smaller cord do occur. 
Usually, cord impressions start at the lip of the rim and extend 
either diagonally or at right angles to the rim over most of the 
vessel surface. One sherd, however, has cord impressions placed 
parallel to the rim (pi. 3, fig. 23, and pi. 9, fig. 1). A few pieces 
(pi. 8, fig. 10) have a smoothed band for approximately one-half 
inch just below the lip before the cordmarking begins. Many 
pieces appear to have had their surface smoothed over again after 
the paddling had been applied, leaving a faint trace of the cord- 
marking (pi. 9, fig. 4). 

The most common form of vessel is the deep globular bowl 
with thin, slightly incurving rim (pi. 3, figs. 24, 25, 29, and 
table 11). There are also frequent examples of a slightly everted 
rim (pi. 3, figs. 21, 22, 23, 27, and 28), this latter type being the 
one that Jennings found to be the most common in Lee County 
area. A few rims are neither incurving nor everted, but are 
straight, slanting pieces from open bowls (pi. 3, fig. 26). No 
handles, lugs, or feet were observed for either of these vessel 
shapes. Two sherds, both with slightly everted rims, show that 
additional strips of clay, in these cases very thin ones, were added 
to the rim section after the completion of the vessel, possibly in 
an effort to strengthen the rim (pi. 3, fig. 28). In both cases the 
original surface had been cordmarked beneath the present extra 
layer of clay, and then the extra strip was similarly paddled after 
it had been added. 

Furrs Cordmarked is distinguished from Tishomingo Cord- 
marked (see below) by the fact that Furrs is predominantly a 
sand-tempered ware. But occasionally clay pellets and grit are 
noted. Since Tishomingo Cord is predominantly clay-grit tem- 
pered, but does contain some sand, the dividing line between the 
two is not sharp and distinct, and the type Furrs Cordmarked 
blends into the type Tishomingo Cordmarked. In the Bynum 
excavation it was not possible to find a stratigraphic or sequen- 
tial difference between the Furrs and Tishomingo Cordmarked, 
but the distinction was made in the laboratory on the basis of 
Jennings' published description and actual sherd comparisons 
between the Bynum material and that excavated by Jennings 
(1941, pp. 199-200). In his Lee County excavations Jennings 
found justification stratigraphically for the distinction between 
Furrs and Tishomingo Cordmarked. In speaking of the excava- 
tions at site MLe-62 and the occurrence of Tishomingo Cord- 
marked, he says: 

More than 5,400 of the specimens of this type (Tishomingo) came from 
the village surface collections. From the old humus beneath the mound 
and from the mound itself only occasional sherds of the Tishomingo types 
were collected. The Furrs and Baldwin types predominated in the mound 
fill and old humus collections, although they were also recovered from the 
village. This distribution of types indicates two chronological brackets for 
the material, with the Tishomingo types (which resemble the Dcasonville 
types) being the later of the local cordmarked types (Jennings, 1941, pp. 
198-199). 



Tishomingo Cordmarked (pi. 9, figs. 5-13, inclusive), pre- 
dominantly a clay-grit tempered ware, often contains clay pellets 
and charcoal fragments and occasionally even fossil shells. The 
paste is lumpy, irregular, and contorted. Paste color is usually 
gray or dull brown. Interiors are smoothed, and exterior colors 
are dull red, browns, and tans. The decoration of applied cord- 
marking is always on the exterior of the vessel. It generally is 
irregularly applied with paddles wrapped with strings averaging 
a millimeter or less in width and more closely spaced together than 
the Furrs Cordmarked. 

The most common form of vessel seems to be a deep globular 
bowl with thin rounded lip and slightly incurving rim (pi. 3, 
figs. 30, 31, 33, and table 13). Usually the lip is thinner than 
the vessel wall, though occasionally it has been left in a roughened 
condition which makes it equally thick. A few sherds are noted 
in which there is a slight eversion of the rim (pi. 3, figs. 34, 35, 
and table 14), but the majority are of the incurving type. A few 
are neither incurving nor everted but are straight-sided fragments 
of open bowls (pi. 3, fig. 32). No appendages are noted for this 
type. The best criteria for differentiating between Tishomingo 
and Furrs Cordmarked are the type of temper and the size and 
spacing of the cord marks. Furrs is sand-tempered with gen- 
erally thicker and more widely spaced cording. (Compare fig. 2, 
Furrs Cordmarked, with fig. 6, Tishomingo Cordmarked, on 
pi. 9.) As noted by Jennings, Tishomingo Cordmarked is prob- 
ably an outgrowth of and later development from the Furrs Cord- 
marked (Jennings, 1941). 

Tishomingo Plain is exactly the same as Tishomingo Cord- 
marked except that both interior and exterior surfaces of Tisho- 
mingo Plain are smoothed. Vessel forms (pi. 4, figs. 1-5, in- 
clusive, and table 15) are predominantly the incurving bowl type 
except that three sherds with clay temper showed up from the 
village area which, if it were not for their clay-grit temper, would 
be classed as good examples of right angle everted rim, Baldwin 
Plain (pi. 4, figs. 3, 4, and 5). It may be that these three sherds 
represent a carry-over of an earlier sand-tempered form into the 
later clay-grit period. Because there are only three of them, they 
have been classified under Tishomingo Plain. A few sherds show 
a slightly flaring rim similar to that noted in Tishomingo Cord- 
marked. 

Houlka Gray (pi. 10, figs. 1-4, inclusive, and pi. 4, figs. 6-9, 
inclusive), a sand-tempered ware, is one that so far as is known 
is peculiar to the Bynum site. As its name implies, it is gray 
in color, both exterior color and paste color. Large spicules of 
sand are frequently observable and, like the other sand-tempered 
wares, it is friable and gritty to the touch. Both surfaces are 
often covered with minute holes or depressions as if some material 
had weathered out from the original, or as if the sherd were com- 
posed of tufa or volcanic ash. Reaction with hydrochloric acid is 
negative. 

It occurred largely in the village area, though some examples 
were recovered from beneath log molds at the base of mound B 
and in zones just above the undisturbed red clay below the mound. 
Several samples were found deep in post molds of feature 14 and 



19 



a few in feature 19. But none whatsoever were recovered in or 
around mound D. 

Sherds of Houlka Gray are both plain and fabric-impressed. 
Because of their small number (total 381) no type differentiation 
is made between the plain and decorated sherds. Very probably 
the plain sherds are merely the undecorated portions of the fabric- 
impressed vessels. Vessel forms (table 16) are globular pots with 
noticeably everted rims and thinned lips (pi. 4, figs. 7 and 8) and 
vessels which had rims almost straight (pi. 4, figs. 6 and 9). No 
lugs or handles or other appendages are known for this type, nor 
were any complete vessels of Houlka Gray recovered in the exca- 
vations. Comparison with surface survey collections from other 
areas of northeastern Mississippi, even from sites near Bynum in 
Chickasaw County, have so far failed to reveal material of a sim- 
ilar nature from any place other than Bynum. It may be that 
these sherds represent a purely local type of pottery made from a 
distinctive gray clay obtainable near the Bynum site. 

Of the decorated sherds, all are fabric-impressed (pi. 10, figs. 
1, 2, and 3), none is cordmarked. This fact, plus the same sand 
temper, would tend to place this type into the same category as 
the early Saltillo Fabric, but, since it is not found associated with 
any of the Baldwin Plain or Saltillo Fabric that was isolated by 
mound D, presumably it is a later variant of these earlier types. 
Its association with pit and sublevels of mound B would tend to 
make it just a shade earlier than, or contemporaneous with, Furrs 
Cordmarked. 

Minority wares. A small number of sherds (total 92) were 
recovered during the excavations which do not fall into any of 
the above classifications and which in most cases at least are in- 
dicative of outside or trade influences. Among these were 21 
sherds which fitted together to form one-half bowl of the type 
Marksville Stamped (pi. 2, fig. 25, and table 17). This vessel 
depicts a bird motif, oudined by deep incisions, with portions of 
the design element being enhanced by rocker stamping. It fits 
the description of this type as given by Ford and Willey ( 1940, 
p. 65), and is characteristic of the Marksville period at the Crooks 
site in Louisiana. It was found in feature 20, a partial circular 
post mold pattern in the village area. This circular post mold 
pattern was filled to a depth of about 4 feet with sand, and the 
partial vessel was found in the sand at a depth of 2 feet. Twenty- 
seven other sherds were recovered from this feature, which with 
one exception, a Tishomingo Plain sherd from the surface to 1- 
foot level, were all sand-tempered types. Three were Furrs Cord- 
marked, two were Saltillo Fabric Impressed, the rest were Bald- 
win Plain except for the one Tishomingo Plain. If the deposition 
of this fragment of a Marksville pot is the same as for the other 
sherds, there is then a good likelihood of equation between the 
Marskville period and the sand-tempered horizon at Bynum. It 
is, of course, possible that the pot could be a hold-over from a still 
earlier period or an inclusion into an earlier post mold pattern 
from a later period. However, the finding of this Marskville 
fragment with sand-tempered wares would seem to indicate their 
contemporaneity at Bynum. 

Four other sherds of Marksville Stamped were also recovered 
from the excavations. Two came from the village area; one on 



the surface, the other in the plow zone (pi. 4, fig. 20). One, a 
small fragment of rim-incised vessel, came from the pit floor 
(feature 8) of mound B. The fourth and largest fragment (pi. 4, 
fig. 10) came from feature 16, fire pit, at a depth of 1.6 feet below 
the plow line. All sherds from feature 16, except for one lime- 
stone-tempered sherd, were sand-tempered. 

One other sherd, with broad, curved incisions of the type Marks- 
ville Incised, was found 0.3 foot below the mound surface in 
mound B. This sherd shows no signs of rocker stamping as do the 
other four. Evidence is scanty, but what little there is all points 
to the fact that the sand-tempered horizon at Bynum and the 
Marksville period of the Lower Valley can be equated in that the 
Marksville influence seems to have penetrated to Bynum during 
the later part of the sand-tempered period at Bynum. Marksville 
influence seems to be absent from the old village layer beneath 
the mounds, and absent from association with mound D, but is 
associated with the building of mound B and with features in 
the village area which are likewise probably equated with the 
building periods of mounds A and B. 

Seventeen sherds were limestone-tempered (table 18). Of these 
17, 5 were decorated and 1 was a lug or handle. Three of the 
decorated sherds can be identified as Wright Check Stamp 
(Southeastern News Letter, vol. I, No. 1) (pi. 10, fig. 8); the 
other two are very indistinct but bear a different design than a 
plain-check stamp. They are both small sherds, but they may 
represent portions of vessels originally decorated with Pickwick 
Complicated Stamped (Southeastern News Letter, vol. I, No. 1) 
(pi. 10, fig. 9). With one exception, all the limestone-tempered 
sherds came from the village area. The one exception was a 
Wright Check Stamped sherd which came from the northern 
edge of mound B in the mound fill. It was at this point along 
the edge of the mound that an irrigation ditch had been dug, some 
years previous to our excavations, so that the association of this 
sherd with the mound fill is very dubious. One other decorated 
sherd of the possible Pickwick Complicated Stamped variety came 
from a fire pit associated with feature 16. One plain sherd came 
from a post mold in feature 14. Otherwise, the remaining lime- 
stone sherds were all found within the plow zone of the village 
area. Since the association of the one limestone sherd with mound 
B is so dubious and since the remainder of the sherds came from 
within or near the plow zone of the village area, it would indicate 
that limestone-tempered sherds were introduced into Bynum from 
elsewhere and that this introduction was subsequent to the sand- 
tempered series at Bynum and either contemporaneous with or 
just before the clay-grit series. It would likewise appear that the 
limestone tempering was not known until after the erection of 
mounds A, B, and D. In the Pickwick Basin, limestone-tempered 
sherds are subsequent to the sand-tempered sherds (Haag, 1942, 
p. 523), and a similar sequence is indicated in the Bynum mate- 
rial. Griffin has pointed out, however, that it is possible to postu- 
late (as he does) that — 

During the cultural development in northern Alabama after the preceramic 
cultures there was a period when a small proportion of fiber and sand- 
tempered types were produced along with the dominant early limestone- 
tempered wares (1945, p. T-li). 



20 



It is possible then that the limestone sherds found at Bynum 
are part of the regular sand-tempered horizon and not indi- 
cative of a later period after all. But, as none of the sherds tem- 
pered with limestone were found in positive association with any 
mound or premound features, it seems most likely that, at Bynum 
anyhow, the limestone-tempered wares, if not post-sand temper, 
are at least in the later phase of that period. 

The paucity of limestone sherds at Bynum is partly accounted 
for by the lack of limestone in this area to use as tempering mate- 
rial. These 17 sherds most likely represent fragments of vessels 
which had originally been actually imported into the site from 
elsewhere (most likely the Pickwick Basin area). 

A few (n) sand-tempered sherds are decorated with the im- 
print of a single cord or strand of small twined string. Six are 
rim pieces in which the single cord impression occurs near to 
and parallel to the rim. Four pieces have the addition of a row 
or rows of punctatons. In paste, color, and composition these 
sherds are all perfectly good Baldwin Plain except for the added 
cord impressions. One sherd, a right angle everted rim form, 
in addition to the main cord impression parallel to the rim has 
a series of smaller short cord impressions so arranged as to form 
a triangular pattern (pi. 4, fig. 18, and pi. 10, fig. 11). Another 
sherd combines a single cord impression with a small hollow reed 
punctation above and below the line (pi. 10, fig. 10). Two others 
are combinations of angular jab punctations with cord impres- 
sions. With two exceptions, all these single cord-impressed sherds 
came from features in the village area (table 19). The two excep- 
tions came from the bottom of the fire pit (feature 10) in mound B. 

Alexander Incised, a sand-tempered ware more prevalent in 
the Pickwick Basin area, was represented at Bynum by eight small 
sherds. Two are rim sherds with thin vertical incisions extending 
from the lip over the rim and below which are incised lines 
parallel to the rim (pi. 4, fig. n). Three other sherds are pieces 
which are almost rims, but the lip portions are missing. They are 
decorated with horizontal incisions similar to the first two. The 
remaining three sherds are small samples which have broad in- 
cised lines on them, one with a single line, the other two with 
double lines (pi. 4, fig. 14). Paste, color, and composition of 
these sherds match the description as given in Southeastern News 
Letter, volume I, No. 1. The scarcity of sherds of Alexander 
Incised would show that a few vessels of this type had been 
actually imported into Bynum rather than that these were local 
copies of a well-known pottery type. 

Only one of these sherds was in any way associated with mound 
D (table 20). It was found near the top of the mound on the 
south side at a depth of 0.8 foot in the mound fill. It is possible 
that this sherd was an accidental inclusion in the mound fill from 
a time subsequent to the erection of the mound. 

Two of the sherds of Alexander Incised were found in mound 
B, feature 10, at the bottom of the fire pit, and one was found 
in feature 33, just to the west of mound B. The remainder came 
from the village area or from features 17 and 24. Both these 
latter features are predominantly sand-tempered in their pottery. 
It thus appears on the basis of the meager evidence of eight sherds 



that influence in the nature of sand-tempered trade wares was 
being received at Bynum from the northeast in the vicinity of 
Pickwick Basin sometime during the mound erection period, a 
period which, based on the sherds at Bynum, was a sand-tem- 
pering period. Alexander Incised is chronologically later than 
fiber-tempered wares and belongs to the sand-tempered series 
which on the whole preceded limestone temper and clay-grit 
temper (Haag, 1942). Finding it associated predominantly with 
sand-tempered wares at Bynum, where fiber temper is unknown, 
confirms its same chronological place in the Bynum sequence. 

Miscellaneous sherds (pi. 4, figs. 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 21, and 
pi. 10, figs. 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16). Thirty remaining 
sherds are unusual enough to warrant their separation from the 
remainder of the Bynum ceramic material. Most are not easily 
classifiable into any of the better known pottery types of the 
Southeast. Of these 30 sherds, 10 are decorated with incising of 
1 kind or another. One clay-tempered sherd with a bulbous 
incurving rim has a series of squarish punctations on the outside 
just below the rim, underneath which is a broad incised line run- 
ning parallel to the rim (pi. 4, fig. 17, and pi. 10, fig. 15). A 
second gray sand-tempered sherd has two medium incised lines 
crossed by a third at right angles. The incisions have been some- 
what smoothed over and obliterated subsequent to being incised 
(pi. 4, fig. 12). A third reddish-brown sand-tempered sherd 
(pi. 4, fig. 15) has two thin incised lines on either side of which 
is a series of small angular jab punctations. This latter sherd 
came from the fill of mound D, 2.2 feet above the old sod line. 
Of the remaining sherds, one shows a small incised triangle with 
interior punctations (pi. 4, fig. 16) and the remaining six small 
sherds are all sand-tempered with incised decoration varying from 
simple geometric incisions, curvilinear incisions, to punctations 
and thin, fine incised lines, almost like engraving. The last and 
tenth sherd of this group is one which shows thin brushed in- 
cisions over all its surface (pi. 10, fig. 16). 

Nine sherds of a dark-reddish hue tempered with fine sand 
have a crisscrossed design incised on them. The incising is crude 
and deep and not in a regular pattern (pi. 10, figs. 5-7, inclusive, 
and pi. 4, fig. 13). Possibly the surface of the vessel had been 
sun-dried before the design was applied. One of the sherds is a 
rim piece, which on the outside has a small thin fillet of clay added 
from the lip for a distance of three-eighths of an inch down the 
side of the vessel (pi. 4, fig. 13, and pi. 10, fig. 5). It shows that 
the original vessel shape had been that of a small open-mouthed 
bowl with vertical rim. Six of the nine pieces were found to- 
gether one-half foot from the surface in the fill of mound B. Two 
other pieces were found at the west border of mound B, 0.6 foot 
below the surface in the mound fill and the ninth piece came from 
feature 11, mound B, 0.8 foot below the surface. All nine pieces 
appear as though they came from the same vessel, though none 
of them could be matched together. Because of their prevalence 
in the upper portion of the mound fill in mound B close to the 
surface, they could be late accidental inclusions in the fill. The 
provenience of these sherds is not diagnostic as to their place in 
the Bynum sequence. 



21 



Two unusual sherds were found at the bottom of the fire pit 
in feature 10 of mound B, and a similar one from the ash layer 
under the log molds of feature 8, mound B. These three sherds 
all have the appearance of having been fire-heated to such an ex- 
cessive degree that their components actually boiled and bubbled 
(pi. 10, figs. 12, 13, and 14). All are light, porous, gray in color 
and full of both large and minute holes. The sherds are mis- 
shapen, distorted, and swollen. Particles of sand-tempering are 
still visible in them. One is unmistakably a rim sherd, but its 
outer surface is now swollen with a great "blister" (pi. 10, fig. 12). 
Were it not for their swollen and bubbled appearance, one might 
suspect that these three sherds had been carved from tufa, or vol- 
canic ash. Since all were found in areas in which at one time 
there had been fires, it is possible that something either in the fire 
or inherent in the sherd itself made the heat of the fire rise to a 
degree sufficient to cause some substance in the sherds to liquify 
and subsequently to boil. 

Three bone-tempered sherds were recovered, two from the 
village area unassociated with feature or mound and the other 
from feature 23. Bone tempering is more a Southern Plains' 
Caddo pottery characteristic than a southeastern one, though Jen- 
nings found some of his sherds of type Wilson Plain from Mle-62 
were tempered with crushed bone (Jennings, 1941, p. 189). Wil- 
son Plain is a pottery type that chronologically occurs later than 
the sand-tempered., cordmarked, or clay-grit wares. It is more 
comparable in time to the shell-tempered wares of the Middle 
Mississippi phase. These three bone-tempered sherds are most 
logically a very minor manifestation of a much later occupation 
of the site than the mound-building period. No pottery was 
found definitely associated with the historic occupation of the 
Bynum site as represented by the burials with historic trade goods, 
but these three bone-tempered sherds might possibly be either 
of that period or of an earlier transient protohistoric period. 

Two very hard-baked, fine-grained, sand-tempered sherds were 
recovered from the village. Both have a marked white interior 
and exterior surface, the whiteness extending down into the in- 
terior paste for a discernible distance. The interior core is a gray- 
black color. At first it appeared as if these sherds had been 
painted white, but cross-section examination showed that the white 
edging extended into the dark paste and was most likely caused 
by firing. 

One red-painted sherd was found on the west side of mound A 
in the sod zone. The exterior is a dull dark red, the interior is 
smoothed and smoothing marks still show. It is clay-grit tem- 
pered. This was the only sherd with any form of paint or red 
filming found at Bynum. 

One sherd of unknown type, a curved piece of plain ware, was 
evidently tempered with some material that has now weathered 
out. The surfaces and interior core both show small shallow 
holes. On the interior they appear as very thin lenses. Reaction 
with acid was negative. 



ANALYSIS 

{Pottery found in association with mounds, 
features, and burials) 

The following section presents in tabular form the statistical 
analysis of the pottery which was recovered from the Bynum ex- 
cavation as that pottery relates to the various mounds, features, 
and burials uncovered at the site. Pottery types are the same ones 
as discussed in the foregoing section of this manuscript. At the 
end of each tabular count is a statement regarding that particular 
feature or mound which sums up the information given in the 
analysis. Following this section is a third which attempts to bring 
together the facts and suggestions brought out in the analysis and 
which places the various pottery features of the Bynum site in 
relation to each other, and Bynum pottery as a whole in relation 
to other southeastern archeological sites. 

Mound A 









rype and number 




Depth 


Bald- 
win 
Plain 


Fabric 

Im- 
pressed 


Furrs 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 


Miscel- 
laneous 


Surface to 1 .0 foot 

Mound fill 


62 
14 

68 

19 

2 

8 


13 

8 

25 
9 
1 

10 


14 




4 


1 


1.0 foot above mound 
floor to mound floor. . . . 


4 


1 






On mound floor 






Old sod 










Sealed off" in post molds 
(feature 7) 


















Total (263) 


173 
65.7 


66 

25.2 


18 
6.8 


1 
0.4 


4 
1.5 


1 


Percent 


0.4 







Mound A, like B, shows that as the mound was being erected cord- 
marking was known. It seals off earlier pure sand-tempered village refuse, 
and the mound fill gathered from earlier village refuse is only sand temper. 
Overlaying surface of mound, though, has greatest percentage of cord- 
marking. Here the majority of cordmaking is sand-tempered Furrs type. 
It is thus possible that mound A falls between mound D and B in chronologi- 
cal sequence. 

Mound A — Feature 7 

Baldwin Plain 8 

Fabric Impressed 10 

Total 18 

These sherds are pure sand-temper horizon and sealed off by mound A, 
thus effectively segregating a fabric sand-temper horizon from a later cord 
sand horizon and cord clay-grit horizon. 



22 



Pit northwest of mound A 



Pit 60 feet northwest of mound A 





Type and number 


Depth 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Furrs Cord- 
marked 


Bottom of sod to 0.5 foot below (0-0.8 foot) 

Total 2. 


1 


1 



Shallow pit. Paucity of sherds undiagnostic. Possibly sand-temper 
horizon at beginning of cordmarked period. 



Depth 


Type and number 


Sod bottom to 0.5 foot below 


J Fabric Impressed. 



Pit of pure sand-temper fabric horizon but sherds too few to be diagnostic. 



Mound B 















Type anc 


number 












Depth 


Marks- 

ville 
Incised 


Marks- 

ville 
Stamped 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


Furrs 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 


Houlka 
Gray 


Lime- 
stone 
Tem- 
pered 


Single 
Cord- 
marked 


Alex- 
ander 
Incised 


Miscel- 
laneous 


Below surface ■ — 1.0 foot 






279 
14 
63 

113 
48 
20 
41 
95 
32 
63 
4 
1 

17 
1 


72 

6 

140 

86 
13 
15 
31 
75 
26 
140 


60 
2 


63 
4 


53 
3 


1 


1 






9 


In fill 1.0 to 2.0 feet 












In fill 






1 
1 










0.1 foot above mound floor to 
mound floor . 










1 










On/in mound floor. . . 


1 


1 














On rim, central feature. . . 


1 
1 

2 
3 




1 












On/in log molds 








2 

11 

3 








1 


Under log molds 






2 


1 










Pit fill, feature 10 














Fire pit, bottom feature 10 












2 


2 


3 














1 




























Old sod, under mound 






2 
2 


















Scaled off in post molds 












































Total (1,636) 


1 

0.1 


1 

0.1 


791 
48.3 


608 
37.2 


69 
4.2 


69 

4.2 


59 
3.6 


20 
1.2 


1 
0.1 


2 
0.1 


2 
0.1 


13 


Percent 


0.8 



Sealing off of pure sand-tempered Baldwin Plain and Saltillo Fabric Im- 
pressed in the post molds and in the old sod shows these were precedent to 
the mound erection. Cordmarked sherds under and in the log molds are 
impossible to explain away. The people erecting the mound knew cord- 
marked pottery and used it as seen by the cordmarked sherds in the log molds, 
yet dirt for the mound fill came mainly from the earlier pure sand-tempered 
village area for cordmarked sherds are lacking in the main mound fill. 
The large amount of cordmarked ware in the first foot of the mound sur- 
face shows that cordmarking was becoming more prevalent (from 2 to 32 
percent) in the last phases of mound erection or else that after the mound 
was completed this ware was lost and scattered over the mound surface. 



South of mound B in pit 





Depth 


Type and number 




Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


0-0.5 foot 


8 
1 


11 


0.5-1.0 foot 


3 








Total (23). . . 


9 
39 


14 


Percent 


61 







Pit of pure sand-temper horizon. Absence of cordmarking, especially in 
first one-half foot, may be accidental. 



23 



Mound D 





Type and number 


Provenience 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


Furrs Cord- 
marked 


Tishomingo 
Cordmarked 


Alexander 
Incised 


Miscel- 
laneous 


Total 
















25 


0-0.5 foot 


2 
15 






1 








0.5-1.0 foot 


6 


1 








Wash from mound 








g 


0-0.5 foot 


2 

1 
2 


1 

2 












0.5-1.0 foot 












1.5-2.0 feet 












Fill 












168 


New sod line to 1.0 foot down 


20 
30 
66 
95 


7 
20 
23 
17 






1 






Middle fill 






1 




Old sod, 1 .0 foot up 










Old sod beneath mound 








1 


113 










15 


0-0.5 foot 


3 

3 
2 














0.5-1.0 foot 


4 
3 












1.0-1.5 feet 






















68 


On rim 


58 
1 
1 
1 
1 


7 












0.6 foot below rim 












1.3 feet below rim 














2.1 feet below rim 














Beneath old sod : 0.4 foot below top of old sod 












1 
















Total 


303 
76.1 


90 
22.6 


1 

0.3 


1 

0.3 


1 

0.3 


2 
0.4 


398 


Percent 









Of a total of 398 sherds from mound D, all but the following are either 
sand-tempered Baldwin Plain or Fabric Impressed: 
1 Furrs Cordmarked. 

1 Tishomingo Cordmarked. 

2 Miscellaneous Incised. 
1 Alexander Incised. 

Both the Furrs and Tishomingo Cordmarked were found in areas peripheral 
to the actual mound during exploratory trenching, the Tishomingo Cord at 
a depth of 0.4 foot from surface and the Furrs at 0.7 foot from surface. 
The Alexander Incised came from the mound fill in the first foot below 
the surface. 

The two miscellaneous sherds are incised and/or punctated sherds, sand- 
tempered, reddish brown in color. One came from the old sod at a depth 
of 5.5 feet to 6.0 feet beneath mound surface. It is marked with two parallel 
deeply scored, incised lines, 0.5 inch apart. The lines were made with a 
sharp, pointed tool. 

The second miscellaneous sherd, also sand-tempered, was encountered in 
the middle fill of mound D. It is a punctated sherd with two closely parallel 
incised lines on the middle (pi. 4, fig. 15). On either side of the incised 
lines is a double row of angular jab punctations. 

The Baldwin Plain and Fabric Impressed from mound D is outstandingly 
thicker, sandier (larger grained sand) and more crumbly texture, than other 
Baldwin Plain and Fabric Impressed. A common rim form is the flat, 
everted rim which, while not unique for mound D, still is highly charac- 
teristic of it (pi. 1, figs. 1— 13). The most common rim shape, however, is a 
simple flaring rim (pi. 2, figs. 1-5). 



Mound D ceramics are very homogeneous. Absence of cordmarking in 
connection with mound proper is highly diagnostic. Total absence of lime- 
stone temper (as opposed to mound B) is of interest. No Houlka Gray 
recovered either. Ceramics are pure, homogeneous group with inclusion of 
two miscellaneous incised sherds. 

Mound F 



Depth 



0.2 foot below sod, 0.4 foot below surface 

Top of charcoal below sod, 0.2 foot below surface. . . 

0.9 foot in mound fill 

1.4 feet in mound fill on top of burned clay 

0.6 foot in mound fill 

0.5 foot below top of undisturbed earth in post mold 

Total (9) 



Type and number 



Baldwin 
Plain 



Fabric 
Impressed 



Mound F, on the appearance of a few sherds (total 9), seems to be 
entirely of the sand-tempered horizon like mound D. 



24 



Feature 14 





Type, number, and percentages 


Depth (in post mold from 
surface) 


Baldwin Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


Furrs Cordmarked 


Tishomingo 
Cordmarked 


Tishomingo 
Plain 


Houlk 


a Gray 


Total 




Number 


Percent 


Number 


Percent 


Number 


Percent 


Number 


Percent 


Number 


Percent 


Number 


Percent 


Number 


Percent 


6-1.0 foot 


188 

120 

10 

2 


37.2 
43.0 
35.7 
40.0 


214 

80 

14 

2 


44.7 
28.6 
50.0 
40.0 


9 
3 
1 


1.8 
1.0 
3.5 


14 
2 


2.9 
.7 


4 
5 

1 


0.8 
1.7 
3.5 


47 

68 

2 

1 


9.8 
24.3 

7.1 
20.0 


476 

278 

28 

5 


60.5 


1.0-2.0 feet 


35. 3 


2 0-3 feet 


3 6 


3 0-4 feet 






6 


















Total 


320 


40.7 


310 


39.3 


13 


1.7 


16 


2.0 


10 


1.3 


118 


15.0 


787 









Feature 16 





Type and number 


Depth 


Bald- 
win 
Plain 


Fabric 

Im- 
pressed 


Houlka 
Gray 


Lime- 
stone 
Tem- 
pered 


Single 
Cord- 
marked 


Marks- 

villc 
Stamped 


1.6 feet below 
plow line in fire 
pit 












1 


Plow line to 3 
feet below in 
fire pit 


66 


40 


8 


1 


1 








Total (117). . . 
Percent 


66 
56.5 


40 
34.3 


8 
6.8 


1 
0.8 


1 

0.8 


1 

0.8 







Feature 14 is predominantly sand-tempered ware of the Baldwin Plain 
and Satillo Fabric Impressed type. Small percentages of clay-grit wares 
appear in the upper levels. Furrs (sand -tempered) Cordmarked appears one 
level lower than Tishomingo Cordmarked. The absence of Limestone Tem- 
pered and Single Cord Impressed is of interest in comparing this feature to 
others. This lack could be accidental or it might indicate greater antiquity 
for this feature. It is probably accidental in that clay-grit types do appear. 
Like feature 19, possible this feature is early and the post molds gradually 
filled in over a period of time as the logs rotted out. 

Feature 16: There is no segregation by depth, but the sherds (with the 
exception of one limestone) are all of sand-tempered period. This fire 
pit is one made and used during times when sand temper was prevalent, 
and it was subsequently abandoned and filed in with refuse of the same 
period. The Marksville Stamped sherd shows also that this fire is just 
prior to clay-grit tempering period and contemporaneous with feature 20. 

Feature No. 17 was fire and refuse pit, hence mixture would be expected. 
Predominance of sand temper is outstanding factor here. Three Tishomingo 
sherds could be accidental inclusions from above. Best analysis is that large 
amount of sand-tempered period refuse dumped here which included single 
cord and that the Tishomingo Cordmarked was later inclusion from above. 
Presence of limestone sherd in bottom layer indicative that this fire pit used 
toward end of sand temper period but prior to introduction of cordmarking, 
for no Furrs Cordmarked (a sand-tempered type) was present at all. 



Village site — Feature 17 



Depth 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 


Houlka 
Gray 


Limestone 
tempered 


Single 
Cord- 
marked 


Alexander 
Incised 


Surface, 0.6 foot . . 




5 

189 

49 














Level I, 0.6-1.4 feet 


105 
11 


2 


1 


7 




4 


1 


Level II, 1.4-1.9 feet 


1 




Level III, 1.9-2.4 feet 






























Total (375) 


116 
30.9 


243 
64.8 


2 

0.5 


1 

0.3 


7 
1.9 


1 

0.3 


4 
1.0 


1 


Percent 


0.3 







25 















Feature 19 
































Type, 


number, and percent 








Depth (post mold) 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


Furrs Cord- 
marked 


Tishomingo 
Cordmarked 


Tishomingo 
Plain 


Houlka 
Gray 


Limestone 
Tempered 


Single 
Cordmarked 


Miscel- 
laneous 




Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


6-1 .0 foot 


427 
165 

22 
2 


42.7 
39.4 
38.0 
18.1 


502 

235 

25 

7 


50.2 
56.2 
43.1 
63.6 


3 
2 
2 


0.3 

.5 

3.4 


5 


0.5 


4 
2 
5 


0.4 

.5 

8.6 


54 

13 

4 


5.4 
3.1 
6.9 


2 

2 


0.2 
.5 


1 


0.1 


1 


0. 


1 0-2.0 feet 


2 0-3 feet 














3 0-4 feet .... 










1 


9.1 
































Total (1,486) 


616 


41.5 


769 


51.7 


7 


.5 


5 


.3 


11 


.7 


71 


4.8 


4 


.3 


2 


.1 


1 




Percent 







Totals by depth: 

0.6-1.0 foot— 999 sherds, 67.2 percent. 
1.0-2.0 feet— 419 sherds, 28.2 percent. 
2.0-3.0 feet— 58 sherds, 39 percent. 
3.0-4.0 feet— 10 sherds, 0.7 percent. 

Feature 19 is predominantly sand-tempered with a minority of Furrs 
Cordmarked and Tishomingo Plain. The Tishomingo Cordmarked occurs 
only in the uppermost level. The association of limestone temper with 
upper two levels is interesting in view of its occurrence in lower levels with 
other notable sand-temper features. (See mound B, features 16 and 17.) 

A possible interpretation here is that these molds represent an early struc- 
ture, possibly premound B and coequal with mound D or with the old 
village debris beneath mounds B and D. The molds were gradually filled 
in as the posts rotted out — thus some were filled in quicker than others and 
caused a mixture of sherds by levels, accounting for Tishomingo Plain in 
the third level. 



Village site — Feature 20 





Type and number 


Depth 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


Furrs 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 


Marks- 
ville 

Stamped 


0-0.5 foot 


15 
1 
3 
2 


2 








0.5-1.0 foot 


3 


1 




1.0-1.5 feet 






1.5-2.0 feet 








21 












Total (48) 

Percent 


21 

43.7 


2 
4.2 


3 
6.3 


1 
2.1 


21 
43.7 







This feature is of interest because of its possible association with the frag- 
ment of Marksville pot. The sherds from this feature are predominantly 
sand-tempered — only one clay-grit. This latter could be an accidental in- 
clusion. Stratification does not show anything. The presence of three Furrs 
Cordmarked plus the small representation of Fabric (only two) would tend 
to put this feature as just post-mound erection but prior to introduction of 
clay-grit (if the one Tishomingo Plain is ignored). 



Village site — Feature 21 



Depth 



0-0.5 foot 

0.5-1.0 foot 

0.5-1.5 feet 

2.0-1- 

Total (68) 
Percent 



Type and number 



Baldwin 
Plain 



29 

7 
8 
4 



48 
70.6 



Fabric 
Impressed 



1 

1 

10 
4 



16 
23.5 



Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 



3 
4.4 



Houlka 
Gray 



1 
1.5 



This feature shows the predominance of sand temper in lower two levels 
and the comparative scarcity of clay-grit in upper levels. Only 3 of the total 
68 sherds are clay-grit. It would appear that the structure represented by 
this circular post mold pattern had been erected and abandoned during sand- 
tempering times. The molds were filled in with mosdy sand-tempered wares 
except for a few clay-grit in upper levels. 

Village site — Feature 22 



Depth 



0-0.5 foot 

0-0.7 foot 

0.3 foot below surface in post mold . 

Total (7) 



Type and number 



Baldwin 
Plain 



Fabric 
Impressed 



Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 



Not very distinctive; could be either sand or clay-grit horizon. 



26 



Village site — Feature 23 





Type and number 


Depth 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 

Impressed 


Furrs 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 


Houlka 
Gray 


Lime- 
stone 


Single 
Cord- 
marked 


Miscel- 
laneous 


Total 


Surface to 0.9 feet 






2 

21 
31 


1 
62 

92 


2 
50 
46 










6 


6-0 9 foot 


50 
49 


30 
33 


1 

2 


2 






216 


6-12 feet 


1 


1 


255 






Total 


99 
20.8 


63 
13.2 


54 
11.3 


155 
32.5 


98 
20.6 


3 
0.6 


2 

0.4 


1 
0.2 


1 

0.2 


477 











This pit is most likely one which was dug by people using clay-grit pottery 
into and through an area of sand-tempered sherds. Heavy concentration of 
the Tishomingo Cordmarked would indicate this in both lower levels. Sur- 



face shows merely Tishomingo Cordmarked and Furrs Cordmarked, but was, 
of course, disturbed by plow. 



Feature 24 





Type, number, and percent 


Depth 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Furrs Cord- 
marked 


Tishomingo 
Cordmarked 


Tishomingo 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


Single Cord- 
marked 


Houlka Gray 


Alexander 
Incised 


Miscellaneous 




Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


Num- 
ber 


Per- 
cent 


0-0.5 foot 


42 

45 

8 

11 

7 


31.5 
51.7 
36.3 
100.0 
33.3 


16 
3 
3 


12.0 

3.5 

13.3 


25 
11 


18.8 
13.0 


13 
4 
1 


9.7 
4.7 
4.5 


34 
19 
10 


25.5 
22.3 
45.5 






1 
2 


1.1 
2.3 






1 
1 


1. 1 


0.5-1.0 foot 


1 


1.1 


1 


1.1 


1.1 


Post mold . . 




1.0-1.5 feet 






















Post mold 














14 


66.6 
















































Total (273) 


113 


41.3 


22 


8.1 


36 


13.2 


18 


6.6 


77 


28.2 


1 


0.4 


3 


1.1 


1 


0.4 


2 




Percent 


0.7 









Total by depth: 

0-0.5 foot — 132 sherds, 48.4 percent. 
0.5-1.0 foot— 87 sherds, 31.9 percent 
Post mold — 22 sherds, 8.1 percent. 
1.0-1.5 feet — 11 sherds, 4.0 percent. 
Post mold — 21 sherds, 7.6 percent. 

The statistics show a trend toward greater predominance of sand-tempered 
wares in lower levels — especially post molds, which, execpt for one Tisho- 
mingo Plain, are pure sand temper. This feature then seems to have been 



erected during the latter part of sand-tempering times and the post holes filled 
in with debris gradually allowing for an overlay of clay-grit cordmarked ware. 



891131 O— 51- 



27 



Feature 2.5 







Type and nun 


ber 




Depth 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 

Im- 
pressed 


Furrs 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 


0.3-13 feet below 

plow line 

Total (12). 


4 


1 


3 


3 


1 



Too few sherds to be really diagnostic, but the indications are this was 
a late pit of the cordmarked times, or, even more likely, the pit was dug 
through earlier refuse by historic Indians, thus turning up sherds of all 
types. 



Feature 26 





Type and number 


Depth 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 


0.3 foot below plow line. . . . 
Plow line to 0.4 foot 


2 
1 

3 


1 






1 
3 


6 


Bottom of plow line to 0.5 
foot below 


2 








Total (19) 


6 


3 


4 


6 







Sherds show that this feature was about evenly divided between clay-grit 
horizon and sand-tempered horizon. Burial 25 in this pit was probably 
intrusive into refuse of both earlier periods. Sherds not directly associated 
with burial. This pit was dug into earlier pottery-bearing levels and mixed 
the distribution. Thus, this pit and its burial (No. 25) are both later 
chronologically than sand -tempered and clay-grit wares. The association of 
trade goods with burial No. 25 would also indicate its relative recency. 



Feature 27 





Type and number 


Depth 


Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


0.3 foot in fire pit 


7 


2 


Total (9). 





Feature 28 



Depth 



1.0 foot below plow line 

Bottom of plow line to 0.5 foot below 

Total (19) 



Type and number 



Baldwin 
Plain 



12 



Fabric 
Impressc 



All these sherds are sand-tempered and hence place this pit in the sane 
tempered fabric period. 



Feature 29 



Depth 



0.5-1.0 foot. 
1.0-1.5 feet. 
0.5-1.5 feet. 
1.5-2.0 feet. 
4.0-4.5 feet. 



Total (53). 



Type and number 



Baldwin 
Plain 



20 
1 

8 



30 



Furrs 
Cord- 
marked 



IS 



Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 



Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 



Predominant type is Baldwin Plain with Furrs Cordmarked second. Smal 
overlay of Tishomingo Cordmarked. As Baldwin Plain is counterpart o 
Furrs Cordmarked, inference is that this feature made and used during Furr: 
Cordmarked period, possibly extending into Tishomingo times. 



Village site — Feature 30 



Depth 



0.6-0.9 foot. 
0.6-1.1 feet. 



Total (78). 



Type and number 



Baldwin 
Plain 



14 



14 



Fabric 
Impressed 



Furrs 
Cord- 
marked 



9 
40 



49 



Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 



i 



Shows only sand-tempered wares for this feature; depth in pit not great 
but, since it is fire pit, this is indication (lacking other evidence) for assign- 
ing this feature to sand-tempered fabric horizon. 



There was slight implication here of reverse stratigraphy. Probably pit 
was cord period pit dug down slightly into earlier sand-tempered area and 
plowing has since upturned the normal stratification. 



28 



Mound D — Feature 32 



Village site — Feature 37 



Type and number 



Depth 



1.0 foot below present sod line in old sod line (cluster 
No. 2) 

1.3 feet below present sod line in old sod (cluster 
No. 1) 

Total (46) 



All these sherds are of early sand-tempered horizon and help to show 
that mound D seals off a fabric-impressed period from a later cordmarking 
period. 




Mound B — Feature 33 





Type and number 


Depth 


Bald- 
win 
Plain 


Fabric 

Im- 
pressed 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 


Houlka 
Gray 


Alex- 
ander 
Incised 


Miscel- 
laneous 


0.2-0.8 foot 


119 

7 


40 


22 


6 


2 


1 


Bottom of sod line to 
1.0 foot 
















Total (197) 


126 


40 


22 


6 


2 


1 



Except for Tishomingo Plain, this is sand-tempered horizon. Depending 
on how much disturbance there may have been, Tishomingo could be later 
inclusion, or more likely, pit dug during clay-grit times into sand-temper 
layer and thus included the earlier sand-tempered material. 



Mound D — Feature 35 





Depth 


Type and number 




Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


Dn pit rim 


23 
2 


5 


Below pit rim 










Total (30). . . 


25 


5 







Feature 35, like the rest of mound D, is of the sand-tempered horizon 
entirely. Again this shows the precedence of fabric -impressed pottery to 
)ottery decorated with cordmarking. 





Depth 


Type and number 




Baldwin 
Plain 


Fabric 
Impressed 


1.5-2.0 feet 


2 
1 


1 


2.0-2.5 feet 










Total (4). . . 


3 


1 







Pit is of pure sand-temper horizon. But there are so few sherds that this 
interpretation is not very definite. 



Village site — Burial 16 

Baldwin Plain 1 

Tishomingo Cordmarked 4 

Tishomingo Plain 1 

Total 6 

Predominance of clay-grit sherds would place this burial in that period. 
Sherds are very few to be truly diagnostic. 



Refuse pit — Burials 24 and 26 





Type and number 


Depth 


Bald- 
win 
Plain 


Furrs 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
ming 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
ming 
Plain 


Houlka 
Gray 


0.1-0.3 foot below plow line. 
Plow line to 0.5 foot below . . 
0.5-1-0 foot below plow line. 


36 
34 
19 


43 
40 
18 


60 
63 

28 


27 

45 

3 


1 


Total (417) 


89 


101 


151 


75 


1 







Complete absence of Fabric Impressed is very strange. Fabric Impressed 
(sealed off under mounds) is earlier than Cordmarked, but this is only ex- 
ample so far of pit that is pure cordmarked without any fabric. Baldwin 
Plain is actually the companion type of Furrs Cordmarked as much as of 
Fabric Impressed. Burials in this pit arc either of cord horizon (post- 
mound period) or even later and intrusive into cord horizon. 

Village site — Burial 21 

Baldwin Plain 3 

Furrs Cordmarked 5 

Tishomingo Cordmarked 12 

Predominance of cordmarked pottery places this burial at a time when 
sand temper was giving way to clay-grit temper and the majority of sherds 
were cordmarked. Or burial could be later and dug down into a layer 
representing only cordmarking. 

29 



CONCLUSIONS 

A classification and analysis of ceramic remains is worth while 
only so far as it (i) helps to develop a chronological sequence for 
the site concerned and (2) helps to place that site in relation to 
the broader aspects of cultural development in the surrounding 
region. Fortunately, fairly well postulated sequential ceramic 
developments for areas adjacent to northeast Mississippi already 
exist. In the Pickwick Basin the type of temper used in pottery 
manufacture seemed to be a valid diagnostic to changing pottery 
wares and could be listed chronologically (Haag, 1942). For the 
Pickwick Basin then a tentative chronological sequence of pottery 
types running from early to late was as follows: fiber-tempered 
ware (Wheeler series), sand-tempered wares (Alexander series), 
limestone-tempered series, clay-grit tempered wares (McKelvey 
series), and the shell-tempered series. Although Griffin rightly 
points out that temper is not always a reliable diagnostic trait 
(Griffin, 1939, p. 127), Jennings found that the same generalized 
sequence as developed in the Pickwick Basin held good in his 
Lee County excavations (Jennings, 1944). 

In the other direction, to the southwest of Bynum in the lower 
valley of the Mississippi, a well-postulated sequence has been de- 
veloped mainly through the work of Ford and Willey. Here 
pottery sequence is based on changes in decorative elements and 
vessel shapes as revealed through stratigraphy in excavation. 
From early to late the periods are as follows, Copell (preceramic), 
Tchefuncte, Marksville, Troyville, Coles Creek, Placquemine, 
Natchez (historic). (Ford and Willey, 1941). 

Although the findings of the Lower Mississippi Valley survey 
have not yet appeared in print, there are indications that in the 
delta area of western Mississippi there is the same general ceramic 
complex of sand-tempered fabric, plain, and cord-impressed wares 
with a small amount of Alexander, or Alexanderlike sherds. In 
speaking of this matter, Griffin says: 

This particular combination is not common in northern Alabama but has 
been found around Tupelo in northern Mississippi by Jennings and farther to 
the west in the Mississippi flood plain by the Central Mississippi Valley survey. 
In these areas the fabric impressed and cord impressed designs are found in an 
early Woodland horizon (Griffin, 1945, p. 229). 

Both around Tupelo and in the delta area of western Mississippi the Alex- 
ander series is found sparingly on sites with a small proportion of fiber tem- 
pered pottery and with a high proportion of the early sand-tempered fabric im- 
pressed and cordmarked pottery (ibid., p. 230). 

It is possible then that the closest relationships to the Bynum 
ceramics will be found to lie more to the west in the delta country 
of Mississippi than to the northeast in the Pickwick Basin, but it 
is impossible at this time to state so until the findings of the lower 
Mississippi Valley survey have been published. 

As can be seen in the analysis of the Bynum pottery, simi- 
larities appeared to lie with pottery more to the northeast than the 
southwest, though a few samples of the latter are noted. Types 
of temper similar to those of Pickwick Basin prevailed, and pot- 
tery types were often indistinguishable from those evolved by 
Jennings in Lee County 40 miles to the northeast. Thus, there 
is an already established sequence on which to base a pottery de- 
velopment for Bynum. As no fiber-tempered ware was found 



whatsoever, sand-tempered wares, as represented by Baldwin 
Plain, Saltillo Fabric Impressed, Furrs Cordmarked, and Houlka 
Gray, are the earliest. Generally accompanying the sand-tem- 
pered wares are the limestone, represented by only 17 sherds. 
Lack of limestones in Mississippi probably accounts for this. Next 
come the clay-grit wares, Tishomingo Cordmarked and Tisho- 
mingo Plain, and lastly the shell-tempered pottery (represented 
at Bynum by three bone-tempered sherds). 

One interesting factor ascertained through analysis of the pot- 
tery is the differentiation between sand-tempered fabric impressed 
ware (Saltillo) and sand-tempered cordmarked ware (Furrs), as 
shown by the pottery recovered from underneath mound D and 
the fill of mound D. The erection of mound D over and on top 
of an old sod level of the original village site effectively sealed 
off this layer so that whatever lay in it was precedent to the erec- 
tion of the mound. (See section on excavations.) In this sealed 
layer only Baldwin Plain and Saltillo Fabric Impressed sherds 
were recovered. In other words, the mound was erected at a 
time during which sand-tempered wares only were known, wares 
predominantly decorated with fabric impressions. Cordmarked 
wares and clay-grit wares were unknown at this time. A few 
miscellaneous sand-tempered sherds with punctated or incised 
decoration represent probable trade ware from other areas. 

In the mound fill no sherds other than Baldwin Plain or Saltillo 
Fabric Impressed were found. Since the fill for the mound came 
from the areas near to the mound and consisted of old village 
debris, cordmarked sherds would be expected in the fill if they 
were in use by the villagers at the time the mound was erected. 
But in mound D this is not so. Thus mound D separates the 
fabric-impressed pottery from the cordmarked and shows that 
there was a chronological difference between them. 

Further evidence of this is noted in mounds A and B where 
beneath the mounds in the old sod and village levels only plain 
or fabric-impressed pottery was recovered. But these latter two 
mounds, while built over an older pure fabric stratum, were evi- 
dently erected at a time when cordmarked pottery was first be- 
coming known and the use of clay-grit had just been introduced, 
for a few sherds of Furrs Cordmarked (sand-tempered) and a 
few Tishomingo Plain (clay-grit temper) were recovered from 
the central feature of mound B and the fill of mounds A and B. 

With the sand-tempered wares being the earliest, those mounds 
and features which show only sand temper or predominantly sand 
temper are earlier than those that are more predominantly clay- 
grit. In the village area, lower levels of post molds, fire pits, etc., 
either revealed pure sand-tempered plain or fabric sherds or at 
least a greater percentage of those types. Predominantly, the clay- 
grit and cordmarked wares were more prevalent in the upper and 
surface layers of the site. On a percentage basis alone this preva- 
lence of clay-grit wares in upper levels would tend to show that 
there was a chronological difference between them and the sand- 
tempered plain and fabric-impressed. But the clear case of dif- 
ferentiation as shown by mound D demonstrates this fact amply. 

Fabric-impressed pottery is found generally throughout the 
Southeast. Often it appears on an early level. It is usually ac- 
companied by cordmarked pottery. In the Baumer Culture (of 



30 



southern Illinois, northern Kentucky, and southwestern Indiana) 
both fabric-decorated and cordmarked pottery is present, but the 
fabric-impressed dominates six to one (Bennett, 1941 ). In west- 
ern Tennessee very little fiber-tempered pottery is found, but a 
Baumer type fabric-marked occurs early followed by a cordmarked 
ware, Harmon's Creek Cordmarked (Lewis and Kneberg, 1947, 
p. 35). In the Pickwick Basin area a very few sand-tempered 
sherds with either cord or fabric impressions were found — 12 cord 
and 15 fabric — but fabric impression comes in strongly in the lime- 
stone-tempered wares, there being 1,592 sherds of Long Branch 
Fabric Marked (Haag, 1942). In the Norris Basin, fabric-im- 
pressed ware and cordmarked ware similar in appearance to that 
of Bynum was recovered, but there the majority of it is either 
limestone-tempered or clay-grit tempered (Griffin, 1938). In the 
Wheeler Basin plain plaited fabric impressions occur on limestone 
and shell-tempered shreds; cordmarking occurs mainly on lime- 
stone, clay-grit, and even shell-tempered sherds (Griffin, 1939, 

P- 157)- 

Collins obtained cordmarked pottery which was tempered with 
crushed sherds at the Deasonville site in the Yazoo Valley of 
Mississippi (Collins, 1932, p. 15). The sherds illustrated by Col- 
lins in plate 2 in his Excavations at a Prehistoric Indian Village 
Site in Mississippi can be easily duplicated by many recovered 
from the Bynum excavations (pi. 8, figs. 10, 11, 12, and pi. 9, figs. 
1-13, inclusive). This cordmarked ware is one of the criteria 
for designating Ford's former Deasonville complex (Ford, 1936, 
p. 143). Another is a red slipped ware; this latter, however, ex- 
cept for possibly one sherd, is missing from the Bynum excavation. 

That fabric-impressed and cordmarked pottery is prevalent 
throughout the southeastern, central, and northern portions of the 
Southeast area seems to be a well-established fact. In the south- 
ern Mississippi area it does not, however, show up in pottery com- 
plexes of Tchefuncte, but it does appear at the close of the Marks- 
ville period and it "achieved the peak of its popularity in the suc- 
ceeding Troyville period" (Ford and Willey, 1941, p. 341)- It 
seems to be a part of the generalized Woodland pattern, possibly 
spreading down from the north and northwest. Griffin, in speak- 
ing of fabric-impressed pottery, says: 

Whenever it occurs, it seems to be associated with Woodland material and 
can be described as a subtype of Woodland pottery (Griffin, 1939, p. 161). 

Just recently in the Etowah drainage of Georgia a situation 
similar to that at Bynum has been discovered in which at one site 
(Two Run Creek, 3-Br) there was a mound and village site. In 
the lowest stratum of the village site fabric-impressed predomi- 
nated by 98 percent but became increasingly less in the higher 
strata. By the time the Indians built the mound, fabric-impressed 
pottery had become much scarcer (only 4.8 percent at mound 
base) and finally it disappeared entirely. Wauchope says of this 
pottery: 

Since fabric-impressed pottery appears at Two Run Creek in the earliest 
evel at full strength and associated only with a small percentage of Mossy 
Dak Simple Stamped, and since it gradually decreases as the other early 
varcs appear (Deptford Check Stamped and Woodstock Stamped), it is 
learly the earliest majority ware in the Etowah Drainage (Wauchope, 1948, 
>. 202). 



The fabric-impressed pottery discussed by Wauchope is com- 
parable to the Dunlap Fabric Impressed of central Georgia (ibid., 
p. 201), which is a sand-tempered ware with "similar and re- 
lated types widespread in Eastern United States from Alabama to 
New England" (Southeastern News Letter, vol. II, No. 2). 
Wauchope says that the site had been abandoned between the 
time "of village occupation and the first mound occupation." 
Thus, the mound erection sealed off the fabric-impressed sand- 
tempered pottery at Two Run Creek site just as mound D did at 
Bynum. 

On the basis of the excavation record and pottery analysis at 
Bynum, plus comparisons with other regions in the southeastern 
field, it seems to be a valid conclusion that fabric-impressed pottery 
is an early pottery trait and that it is often accompanied by cord- 
marked pottery. But in at least two cases to date, Bynum and 
Two Run Creek in Georgia, fabric-impressed is demonstrably 
earlier than the cordmarking. Thus, the earliest pottery mani- 
festation at Bynum is a sand-tempered ware, either plain or fabric 
impressed, with plain vessel shapes that show a marked right angle 
everted rim as well as the more conventional conoidal bowls with 
a slightly flaring rim and occasional open shallow bowls. 

Chronologically following the fabric-impressed pottery, there 
is the sand-tempered Furrs Cordmarked, which in turn is shown 
to be earlier than the clay-grit cordmarked (Tishomingo) by the 
work of Jennings in Lee County (Jennings, 1941 ). These three 
pottery types are ones which are all considered to be generally 
Woodland and reflect influences, trade, or actual migrations into 
the southeastern area from further north and northeast. The 
closest similarities to this pottery are found in the region of Lee 
County, Miss., Pickwick Basin, Ala., the Norris and Wheeler 
Basins, Tenn., and in northern Georgia. Thus, for the Bynum 
site there is a chronological pottery sequence as follows: Baldwin 
Plain and Saltillo Fabric Impressed; Furrs Cordmarked; Houlka 
Gray; Limestone Tempered (sparsely represented); Tishomingo 
Cordmarked and Tishomingo Plain; and a few sherds (such as 
the bone-tempered) probably representative of the shell-tempered 
times. 

The absence of fiber-tempered ware at Bynum (generally con- 
ceded to be the earliest pottery type in the Southeast) is not in- 
dicative that the Bynum sand-tempered wares take its place. For 
surface surveys in both Lee and Chickasaw Counties show that 
there are many sites which produce fiber-tempered ware, some of 
them accompanied only by sand-tempered wares. Just to the 
cast of Bynum, not over 15 miles away, is a small midden site 
(MCs-4) which has produced fiber-tempered pottery ( 1.2 percent) 
as well as numerous good examples of the sand-tempered Alex- 
ander series type sherds (6.1 percent) characteristic of northern 
Alabama. There are even quantities of fabric-impressed (12.1 
percent), Furrs Cordmarked sherds (16.9 percent), and Tisho- 
mingo Cordmarked (2.9 percent) in our surface collection of over 
600 sherds. By far the greatest percentage, however, is repre- 
sented by the sand-tempered Baldwin Plain (47.9 percent). 

A second interesting fact brought out by the excavations and 
pottery analysis of the Bynum site is the affiliation to the south 
as reflected by the portion of a Marksville pot and the few other 



31 



sherds of Marksville type. As already mentioned, the Marksville 
period precedes the cordmarking period in the Lower Valley 
(Ford and Willey, 1941, p. 341), and on scanty evidence seems to 
be coeval with the later phase of the sand-tempered period of 
Bynum. But Tchefuncte, the period preceding Marksville in the 
South, can be equated with the Alexander series (sand-tempered) 
in the Pickwick Basin of northern Alabama (Ford and Quimby, 
1945, p. 91). The few rather dubious sherds of the Alexander 
series as recovered from Bynum would seem to show that full 
Alexander influence was not felt at Bynum, possibly because it 
was already on the wane by the time Bynum was inhabited. Since 
Bynum lies half way between the areas of northern Alabama and 
Marksville, it might be expected to receive influences from both 
directions on a slightly delayed basis, and such seems to be the 
case. Marksville influence at Bynum occurred in the sand-tem- 
pered period at the time cordmarking (Furrs Cordmarked) was 
first known. (See chart No. 1.) 

A third interesting fact is the close agreement between the pot- 
tery sequence as developed at Bynum and that which Jennings 
worked out for Lee County. As already noted, the ceramics are 
very similar. Jennings postulated three pre-Chickasaw periods 
in the Lee County area, all named after the type of site (Miller) 
at which they were first delineated. His Miller I period is charac- 
terized by fiber-tempered plain pottery and sand-tempered textile- 
marked sherds only. Miller II which included domed conical bur- 
ial mounds and other traits also displayed at Bynum was ceramic- 
ally characterized by sand-tempered cordmarked pottery (Furrs), 
vessels with a conoidal or pointed bottom, and some Alexander 
and Tchefuncte wares. Miller III was difficult to separate in all 
traits from Miller II, but the former possessed clay-grit tempered 
pottery (Tishomingo Cordmarked) rather than the types charac- 
teristic of the earlier periods (Jennings, 1944, pp. 411-413). Ap- 
plying Jennings' terminology to the Bynum site, Miller I is repre- 
sented (in its later phases, since no fiber-tempered ware was found) 
by the sand-tempered textile-marked sherds of the old village 
previous to the mound building. Miller II at Bynum is the period 
of mound erection and the rapid development of cordmarked 
wares, first the sand-tempered Furrs and later the clay-grit tem- 
pered Tishomingo. As indicated by Jennings (1944, p. 4 12 ), 
Miller III is difficult to distinguish in all cases from Miller II but 
it is most logically represented at Bynum by the continuation of 
the clay-grit cordmarking and the cessation of mound building. 
No indications of temple mound building were found at the 
Bynum site. The percentage of clay-grit tempered wares (20.13) 
was much less than that of the sand-tempered wares (79.16) and 
would indicate a much shorter occupation of the site during the 
time of clay-grit tempered wares. Once the site was abandoned, 
sometime during the mound building period when clay-grit wares 
were becoming well known, it was not reoccupied until the early 
part of the nineteenth century when a group of historic Chickasaw 
lived there for a short period. 

Chart I gives a schematic presentation of the chronological 
placement of the Bynum site in relation to other better known 
areas. On the left-hand side of the chart are placed the approxi- 



mate guess dates. Then from left to right the archeological areas 
are given in sequence as they proceed from the Lower Mississippi 
Valley geographically northeast to the Pickwick Basin area. On 
the right hand side of the chart are listed the generalized periods 
as postulated by Ford and Willey (Ford and Willey, 1941). Jen- 
nings' Miller periods are indicated along the left side of the column 
representing the Lee County area. Arrangement of the chart is 
based on Ford and Quimby 1945, on Ford and Willey 1941, on 
Jennings 1941, and on Webb and Dejarnette 1942. 

Because of the similarities of some of the nonceramic traits of 
Bynum with traits of Adena, brief reference should be made to the 
pottery sometimes associated with typical Adena sites. Adena 
pottery is predominantly grit or limestone-tempered, and the ma- 
jority of it is either plain or smoothed (Griffin, 1945, p. 225). A 
small amount of cord-marking does appear, and a thickened rim 
and small rim nodes all seem to be characteristic (ibid.). Griffin 
recognizes this pottery as a "significant unit of the widespread 
Woodland ceramic tradition" (ibid., p. 243). If there is any 
relationship between the pottery of Bynum and that which is 
generally considered as Adena, it is on the basis that both are 
manifestations of a basic Woodland ceramic development. A 
few of both the Saltillo Fabric and Furrs Cordmarked show a 
rim thickening which may be related to that employed in Adena, 
but no rim nodes of any sort were noted among the Bynum 
specimens. 

Having thus established a chronology for Bynum based on 
pottery and having related Bynum ceramics in their broader as- 
pects to other areas, it is now possible to examine the features and 
mounds of Bynum and see what, if any, their interrelationship 
may be. Since sand-tempered pottery was found both under the 
mound and in the mound fill but no cordmarked ware occurred 
in either location, the inference is obvious that mound D is the 
earliest of those excavated. Both mounds A and B showed evi- 
dence of cordmarked wares in their fills and associated with their 
principal features. Mound F, which produced only a handful of 
sherds, like mound D was a pure sand-tempered mound, but, since 
mound F was badly eroded by cultivation, the interpretation that 
it is also an early mound is not as valid as in the case of mound D. 
Mound E produced no sherd material, and mound C was un- 
excavated so that these two cannot be used in the discussion. 

The question now arises as to which of the remaining two 
mounds, A and B, was the earlier. Both mounds A and B pro- 
duced cordmarked pottery of the sand-tempered type (Furrs) and 
the clay-grit type (Tishomingo). But in each case the ma- 
jorities of these wares were found within the first foot beneath 
the surface of the mound, where they might most likely occur if 
lost or scattered over the surface of the mound anytime after its 
erection. Sherds occurring this way over the surface and in the 
first foot of the mound fill indicate only that cordmarking and 
clay-grit tempering did not reach their full strength as complexes 
until after the completion of the mounds. In mound A there was 
no cordmarked pottery associated with the central feature, but in 
the fill above the central feature to a height of one foot there was 
1.5 percent Furrs Cordmarked, 0.4 percent Tishomingo Cord- 



32 



Chart I 



A. D. 


Mississippi Lower 

Valley 


Bynum, site 


Lee County, Miss. 


Pickwick Basin 


General periods 


1800 


Natchez 


Chickasaw 


Miller III— 

> 
Miller II— 

r 

Miller I— 


Ackia 


Shell tempered series 




1700 


Tishomingo 
(clay-grit) 




Shell Temper 




DeSoto 


Placquemine 


Temple Mound II 
and 
Temple Mound I 




Coles Creek 


Tishomingo 
(clay-grit) 


McKelvey series 
(clay-grit) 




Troyville 


Burial Mound II 


1000 


Limestone series 


and 


Marksville 


Furrs 

Cord marked 


Furrs 
Cordmarked 




Tchefuncte 


Burial Mound I 




Saltillo 


Saltillo 


Sand-tempered 
Alexander series 








500 


Copell 


Fiber temper 


Fiber temper 


Archaic 



marked, and no Tishomingo Plain. In mound B, however, as- 
sociated with the central feature there was 0.4 percent Furrs Cord- 
marked, 0.1 percent Tishomingo Cordmarked, and 0.1 percent 
Tishomingo Plain. In the foot of fill immediately above the cen- 
tral feature there was only 0.05 percent Tishomingo Plain. (See 
chart No. 2.) Thus, mound A has none of the cordmarking asso- 
ciated with the central feature and only a small percentage in the 
fill and debris immediately above that feature, whereas mound B 
has a much larger percentage cordmarked associated with the 
central feature (especially the rim log molds), but only a small 
percentage in the immediate fill above it. In total quantities 
mound A has the higher percentage of cordmarked ceramics 
(chart No. 2). Although possibly a good case could be made for 
the priority of either mound, mound A seems to be the slightly 
earlier one. As will be shown in the final conclusions of this 
study, there is other evidence of a nonceramic nature for the 
placing of mound A as slightly precedent to the erection of mound 
B. On the basis of ceramics alone, while an interpretation either 
way is possible, priority of mound A is more probable. 

The majority of the features found especially in the village area 
can be assigned relative placements within the Bynum sequence. 
Most of these fit best within the period of sand-tempered pottery 
and, as can be seen from the analysis sheets in the foregoing sec- 
tions, consist of the following features: No. 7 (sealed off by mound 
A); Nos. 32 and 35 (both part of mound D); Nos. 19, 27, and 
28 (probably early in this period); Nos. 14, 16, 21, 24, and the pit 
south of mound B are intermediate; and No. 17 is late in the 
period. No. 37 and the pit 60 feet northwest of mound A had too 



few sherds to be really diagnostic. Feature No. 20 belongs to 
both the early part of the sand-tempered period and to the Furrs 
Cordmarked part. No. 29 is solely Furrs Cordmarked, and No. 
30 may be likewise though more dubiously so. 

Nos. 23 and 16 seem to be purely of the clay-grit period, though 
the latter has rather few sherds to state definitely. Nos 24, 25, 

Chart 2 







Percent 




Provenience 


Furrs 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Cord- 
marked 


Tisho- 
mingo 
Plain 


MOUND A 

Total 


6.8 
None 

1.5 

4.2 

.4 

None 


0.4 
None 

.4 

4.2 

.1 

None 


1.5 


Associated central feature on floor 

1.0 foot above mound floor to mound 
floor 


None 
None 


MOUND B 

Total 


3.5 


Associated central feature 


. 1 


1 .0 foot above mound floor 


.05 



and 26 belong to both the Furrs Cordmarked period and the clay- 
grit period. No. 27 seems to tall into this latter classification but 



33 



has too few sherds to state definitely. Unknown are Nos. 22, 
which has too few sherds of both types, and 25, which was dis- 
turbed by a burial of a later period. No. 33 was of the clay-grit 
period also but was dug down into a layer representative of the 
sand-tempered period. These features are summarized in chart 
No. 3. 

The pottery from the Bynum site presents a remarkably homo- 
geneous appearance, and the strength with which fabric-im- 
pressed sand-tempered ware appears in the earliest levels would 
indicate that it was a full pottery complex in its own right. Out- 
side influences are slight, but what there are can be used as time 
and chronology indicators to afford cross ties with other regions 
better known. Lack of limestone-tempered wares at Bynum is 
easily understandable on the basis of the complete lack of lime- 
stone locally. The few samples recovered are probably actual 
importations. Trade influences from the south are mainly with 
Marksville, an area which is south and west of Natchez. Trade 
influences from the north seem to derive from eastern Tennessee 
and northern Alabama in the Pickwick Basin area. Both areas 
are naturally contingent to the Natchez Trace and indicate that 
even at an early date the Trace (or a comparable path) was being 
used as a trade and commerce route by the Indians as well as a 
hunting and war path. 

Summary. Based on the already established chronological sys- 
tems of nearby areas, a developmental sequence for the ceramics 
of Bynum was worked out as follows: Baldwin Plain, Saltillo 
Fabric, Furrs Cordmarked, and Houlka Gray, all sand-tempered 
wares, seemed to appear at Bynum as the earliest group and to 



have appeared in that order. Toward the close of the sand- 
tempered wares were the limestone wares (of which only a few 
imported samples were found) and in turn next appeared the 
clay-grit wares (Tishomingo Cordmarked and Tishomingo 
Plain). These latter in part overlapped the earlier sand-tempered 
wares. At no time did one type of pottery suddenly cease just 
as the other started. Each was a natural development from the 
preceding one. 

On the basis of the chronological ceramic development it was 
possible to postulate that mounds D and F were the earliest, fol- 
lowed by A and B in that order. Mound D effectively sealed off 
the Saltillo Fabric Impressed ware from the Furrs Cordmarked 
and Tishomingo Cordmarked and formed the basis for the chron- 
ological differentiation between those two types. The majority 
of the features found in the village area belong to the sand-tem- 
pering period, which seems to be the longer period at Bynum 
judging from mere quantity of sherds. Bynum possesses a much 
higher percentage of sand-tempered ware than clay-grit. How- 
ever, features more representative of the later clay-grit period 
would overlay the earlier sand-tempered ones and thus be more 
subject to the forces of erosion and cultivation which seem to 
have removed much of the surface indications from the site. Many 
of the post molds and diagnostic traits which would have indi- 
cated a greater occupation during clay-grit times probably long 
since have been plowed away. 

No pottery was found associated with the burials of the historic 
period, and they are assigned their sequential place on the basis 
of grave goods found with them. It seems that there were two 



Chart 3 

Summary of features 



Sand tempered — Feature No. 


Furrs Cordmarked — Feature No. 


Clay-Grit — Feature No. 


Unknown — Feature No. 


7] 




29 


23 


22 (only a few sherds, both 


19 




30 (dubious) 


16 (dubious) 


types) 


27 
28 


Early 




33 (dug into sand-tempered 
layer) 


25 (disturbed by burial) 


32 










35 


24 






25 






26 




14 




27 (only few sherds) 




16 
21 
24 


Inter- 






mediate 






Pit south mound B 








3 7 l Late 






Pit 60 feet northwest mound A 








20 





34 



main periods of occupation at the Bynum site — one prehistoric, 
during which largely sand-tempered pottery was made and clay- 
grit pottery-making developed, and the second period, which fol- 
lowed the first after a hiatus or abandonment of the site and 
which was characterized by a brief settlement of historic Chicka- 
saws in the early nineteenth century. These latter Indians made 
no native pottery, probably having become completely accul- 
turated to the metal cooking devices of white men. The three 
bone-tempered sherds might indicate that a very few vessels of 
native manufacture were known at this time. The first, or pre- 
historic period at Bynum, can be correlated with the Miller periods 
as developed by Jennings in Lee County; the later phases of Miller 



I coequate with the sand-tempered premound occupation at By- 
num; Miller II is roughly equivalent to the mound-erection phase 
at Bynum, Furrs Cordmarked pottery, and the beginning of the 
introduction of clay-grit wares. Miller III, in its earlier phases 
at least, is equivalent to the short period of post mound, clay-grit 
tempered pottery at Bynum. 

In the next section the nonceramic remains of Bynum will be 
described and discussed and assigned their place in the Bynum 
sequence wherever possible. Then the entire site, both cerami- 
cally and nonceramically, will be considered as a unit; and 
finally such cultural implications will be made as are permissible 
on the basis of the evidence at hand. 



35 



Nonceramic Analysis 



COPPER 

Copper spools. Among the most interesting of the nonceramic 
remains are the copper spools which were recovered from all three 
of the mounds, A, B, and D. These spools are interesting and 
important for two reasons — (i) in the case in which they were 
found definitely associated with a skeleton, they were located on 
the wrists rather than near the head (p. 12, fig. No. 3) and (2) 
some of the specimens recovered were filled with galena. They 
also show that the early Indians possessed a high degree of tech- 
nical skill in cold-working copper and that they possibly knew the 
elementary principles of melting and casting lead. Furthermore, 
the nearest available sources of copper, pure enough for cold- 
hammering and easily extracted from the ground, are the sur- 
face mines in the Lake Superior region. The nearest source of 
lead is in the vicinity of Joplin, Mo. Thus, trade over an ex- 
tensive area is also indicated. 

Dimensions, copper spools 

Mound A: 

No. 1 — 4.2 by 2.2 centimeters, funnel, 1.2 centimeters (field speci- 
men No. 433). 

No. 2 — 4.1 by ? centimeters (crushed at angle), funnel, 1.0 centimeter 
(field specimen No. 434). 

No. 3 — 4.2 by 1.9 centimeters, funnel, 0.8 centimeter (field specimen 
No. 435). 

No. 3 — 4.2 by 1.9 centimeters, funnel, 0.8 centimeter (field specimen 
No. 432). 
Mound D: 

Partially destroyed; lead filling 1.0 centimeter wide, 0.4 centimeter 
thick; radius of spool 2.2 centimeters; funnel diameter 1 .2 centimeters; 
over-all height (estimated) 2.0+ centimeters. 
Mound B: 

No. 1 — Lead filled (poor condition); radius of spool (estimated) 2.2 
centimeters; funnel diameter 0.8 centimeter; lead fill 1.8 centimeters 
wide (extended to central perforation) 0.4 centimeter thick (field 
specimen No. 436). 

No. 2 — Partially lead filled (very fragmentary condition); radius of 
spool (estimated) 2.2 centimeters; lead fill 2.1 centimeters wide (ex- 
tends to and around central perforation); O14 centimeter thick (field 
specimen No. 1754). 

No. 3 — (Badly crushed); 4.0 by 1.8 centimeters; funnel (size now un- 
known) (field specimen No. 665A). 

No. 4 — (Badly crushed); 4.1 centimeters (too crushed to measure thick- 
ness); funnel (size now unknown) (field specimen No. 665B). 

All of the copper spools recovered from Bynum generally con- 
form to a broad type. That is, they are double-cymbal-shaped 
spools; yet each is rather complex in formation. Each spool 
was composed of four separate parts: two funnel-shaped units, 
each with a single wide flaring flange at one end (pi. II, figs. 2b 
and 2c), and two caps, or crown pieces, with curved edges and 



depressed centers with small perforations in the middle that 
fitted over the flanged ends of the funnels. Plate 11, figures 2a 
and 2d, illustrates the various parts which constitute one of these 
spools. Figures 2a-2d are the crowns and Figures 2b and 2c 
are the flanged funnels. The pieces were riveted together by 
hammering the tube of one funnel into the tube of the other and 
then annealing the edges of the crown to the edges of the flange 
on the funnel by cold-hammering the copper. Plate 11, figure 1, 
shows top and side views of one of the complete copper spools 
recovered from mound A which has been constructed in this 
manner. All four spools found associated directly with the wrists 
of burial 1 in mound A were of this type construction and did 
not contain any lead filling. Two of these spools, however, had 
remains of twined string wrapped around the funnel portion of 
the spool. Two of the four spools recovered from mound B 
were also of this type construction, though more deteriorated and 
flattended by earth pressure than the specimens in mound A. 
These two from mound B had twined string emerging from 
the small center hole and extending to the rim of the spool (pi. 
11, figs. 6 and 7). It is interesting to note that Squier and Davis 
(1848, pp. 206-207) mention copper spools of the double-cymbal 
type with thread wound on the axes from mounds at Cincinnati 
and near Chillicothe and offer the suggestion that the concavo- 
convex portions may have been hammered into shape over the 
depressions in a pitted stone such as one located in one of the 
Chillicothe mounds. The same possibility for a use for pitted 
stones at the Bynum site is observed on page 41 of this report. 

The remaining three spools, while generally of the same type 
construction as the first six, differ markedly in one respect, that 
is, the interior portions between the upper surfaces of the 
flanges and the inner surfaces of the crowns were filled with 
galena. This galena has now turned into a whitish semihard 
substance. Through the courtesy of David L. Dejarnett, Curator, 
Alabama Museum of Natural History, an analysis of a specimen 
of this galena was made by Dr. T. N. McVay, Mineralogist. 
McVay rendered the following report: 



Spectograph 


Main 


Small 


Trace 


Pb 


Bu 


Fe 




Cu 


Ca 
Al 
Si 
Ti 
Zr 
Hg 



37 




In my opinion this material was galena which altered in the soil. I un- 
derstand that this material was in a hole in a copper gorget. If so, there was 
probably an electrochemical reaction which aided the alteration of the Pb S 
(Dr. T. N. McVay, Mineralogist). 

Of the two spools from mound B (found associated close to- 
gether, see section on excavations) that contained lead filling, one 
had the galena only in one portion of the spool, the other flange- 
and-crown space was empty and formed like the mound A type. 
In the portion which is lead filled, the under side of the flange is 
flattened out at right angles to the axis of the spool, whereas the 
other flange is curved to match the curve of the crown (pi. n, 
fig. 4, illustrates a diagrammatic cross section of this spool). The 
remaining spool from mound B had lead filling in both halves of 
the spool and, in this case, the under side of each flange was flat- 
tened at right angles to the axis of the spool (pi. 11, fig. 3, illus- 
trates a cross section of this spool). 

The ninth and last spool recovered at Bynum was found in the 
crematory pit in the center of the main feature of mound D just 
below the level of the floor. (See section on excavations, p. 9.) 
Like the above-mentioned type from mound B, this one lone spool 
from mound D was lead filled, both halves being equally filled 
(pi. 11, fig. 3). 

Galena-filled spools are not common in the Southeast. Webb 
found one in the Pickwick Basin at site Lu°63 with burial 10 
(Webb, 1942, p. 155, and pi. 178, fig. 1). Two other nonlead- 
filled spools were found on either side of the teeth caps of this 
burial, the lead-filled spool was about 1 foot away and was broken 
into two halves. Only one half had the lead filling. It was im- 
possible to tell if these two halves were originally joined, but if they 
were, they would make a spool of the type illustrated in plate 11, 
figure 4. Evidences of twine thread were found around the fun- 
nel portion of the lower half (the one without the lead filling). 
In this case, the galena is two to three millimeters thick and six 
to eight millimeters wide, dimensions which correspond closely to 
the other Bynum specimens. 

A second lead-filled spool was found at the Copena burial 
mound site, Ms" 134 in Marshall County, Guntersville Basin, Ala., 
by Webb, but is as yet unreported. (A cross-sectional drawing 
of this specimen appears in ms. by David L. Dejarnette, Prog- 
ress Report on Archaeological Investigations in Alabama, Decem- 
ber 194 1, photo No. 496 CAL, fig. B, p. 10. Further information 
concerning this specimen was supplied through the courtesy of 
Steve B. Wimberly, Curator, Mound State Park, Moundville, 
Ala.) The spool found in the Guntersville Basin is in a frag- 
mentary condition, but evidently both halves were lead filled, as 
in illustration, plate 11, figure 3. It was found unassociated near 
the top of the mound (0.5 foot beneath the surface). The galena 
filling in this case is not pure galena, but seems to be composed 
of about equal parts of clay and crushed galena. 

Such lead-filled copper spools must have been recovered in 
other excavations, but no reports of such are known to the authors. 
It may be that in cases where the copper has not corroded away 
sufficiently to expose the lead filling or the specimen is in such 
good condition that the lead filling is not obvious, this trait has 
gone unnoticed. Or, the three spools from Bynum, the one from 
Pickwick, and the one from the Guntersville Basin may be iso- 

38 



lated examples of experimentation on the part of the early In- 
dians. This last theory, however, does not seem very likely. 
Five specimens are too few in number on which to draw any 
generalities, but it should be noted that in each of these five cases 
the spools were not associated with a skull in the region of the 
ears. In fact, in only one of the five cases (the one from Lu°63) 
was it even remotely associated with a skeleton at all. In this case 
there was found a set of two ear spools in position near the teeth 
caps as though originally placed by or on the ears. The lead- 
filled specimen was found about a foot away from the area of 
the skull. 

It is interesting to speculate as to just how the Indians were 
able to fill a copper spool with lead. It might be assumed that 
lead forms were first molded or hammered and that subsequendy 
the copper spool was made by cold-hammering the copper around 
the lead form. Unfortunately, lead is softer than copper, and 
cold-hammering copper on a leaden form would distort the lead 
mold more than it would mold the copper. The way in which 
the lead fill is level in both halves and does not extend past the 
small center perforation in the copper crown gives a clue to their 
manufacture. Lead has a much lower melting point than copper 
(lead, 327 C; copper, 1,085° C.) and will not stick to it in a 
molten condition. If one of the small central holes in the crown 
of the spool were plugged and then the spool turned upside down, 
melted lead could be poured through the other central perforation 
and would run down between the flange and crown and fill the 
space previously left open. Molten lead would tend to level off 
evenly on all sides of the funnel. When the lead fill on one side 
had hardened, the plug in the central perforation would be 
pulled out and inserted in the other opening, the spool up-ended, 
and the process repeated, thus filling both sides. The flanges on 
the funnels must have been made flat beforehand so that extra 
space for the lead fill would be gained, for these flanges are flat 
in all the specimens which contain lead filling and not in any of 
those which are without it (pi. 11, fig. 3). In the specimen found 
in mound B (pi. 11, fig. 4) in which only half the spool was lead 
filled, it is only that same half which has the flattened flange. 
The other is curved in the manner of those without the lead fill. 
The other interesting factor concerning these copper spools 
from Bynum is the fact that in none of the nine cases was there 
one in which the spool was found associated in any way with the 
skull or the region of the ears. In Hopewell burials copper spools 
are often found on hands or wrists (Morehead 1922, p. 121). In 
most all southeastern cases known to the authors, where copper 
spools have been recovered in association with skeletons, they have 
always been found directly associated with the skull, usually in 
the region of the ears. In fact such is the prevalence of this asso- 
ciation in southeastern burials that these spools are universally 
referred to in the literature as "ear spools." In the Bynum exca- 
vations, however, the four which were found with a burial (burial 
1, mound A) were definitely associated with the region of the 
wrists, one pair to each arm, one spool on each side of the wrist 
(pi. 12, fig. 3). The four spools that were found in mound B 
were located in two pairs about two feet apart, each spool of each 
pair only a couple of inches from its companion. Although no 






sign of a burial was encountered at this point, these spools were 
arranged in such a way that they could have been fitted — one pair 
apiece — to each wrist. But by no means would they have been 
in position to have fitted on the ears or on either side of a skull. 
The ninth spool was found in the crematory pit of mound D in 
close proximity with bits of tooth enamel, the only trace of skele- 
tal remains in the mound. In this case, one can only state that 
the spool was possibly associated with a cremation. 

While lead-filled copper spools are not common in the South- 
east, copper spools in general are quite common. Webb reports 
one from an Adena mound (Metzger mound) (Webb, 1945, p. 
159), and in his trait list (ibid., p. 156), lists Adena as having a 
"trace" of copper ear spools. They are, however, much more 
frequent in Hopewell and in Copena (ibid.). Webb lists them as 
"predominant" for Hopewell and "frequent" for Copena, but they 
are not always of exactly the same form and type of manufacture 
as those found at Bynum. In general, the Copena spools were 

. . . made of very thin sheet copper and some were so corroded that the 
metal had disappeared, leaving only copper salts. Each was constructed of 
two concave disks, riveted together at the center by a small cylinder of copper. 
The disks varied in diameter from 1.3 to 2 inches. Each disk was made of 
a double sheet of copper and several contained remnants of string wound 
around the central rivet (Webb, 1942, p. 157). 

At the Crooks site in Louisiana, the type Marksville site, five 
spools were found (Ford and Willey, 1940, p. 123). Four were 
similar in that they were single concavo-convex disks about 4 centi- 
meters in diameter and about 3 millimeters thick. Each had 
small masses of wood or shell "adhering to the interior sides of 
the spools" (ibid.). The fifth, while of a similar shape, was 
different from the other four: 

Apparently a rather heavy sheet of copper (about 2 millimeters thick) was 
rolled into a cylinder 1 centimeter in diameter. The central portion of the 
tube was retained in that form; but the two ends were spread by hammering 
to make two disks, each over 3 centimeters in diameter. At present the 
disks are much thinner than the connecting tube, and much of them has 
been lost through oxidization (ibid.). 

The latter spool is more of a type with those recovered at By- 
num, though in this case the tube (funnel) and two flanges seem 
to be of one contiguous piece of copper. If this spool from the 
Crook's site was capped with secondary pieces as were those 
of Bynum, the crowns are now gone. The other spools may be 
merely copper-covered wooden earplugs such as the ones re- 
covered in the Hiwassee Island site in Tennessee (Lewis and 
Kneberg, 1940, p. 131). 

The closest similarities with the Bynum spools seem to be those 
recovered in Copena sites in Alabama, which, as mentioned 
earlier, were formed of two funnels with flanged ends which were 
hammered together after the funnel of one had been inserted 
in the funnel of the other. The flanged ends would then be 
capped by a concave crown and the edges annealed by cold-ham- 
mering (Dejarnette, op. cit., pp. 9 and 10). 

Unfortunately, except for one crude copper bead recovered 
from mound D, the copper spools represent the only copper arti- 
facts recovered from the early prehistoric level at Bynum. Com- 
pletely lacking at Bynum are the other characteristic copper arti- 
facts usually associated with Copena burials such as the copper 



bracelets, reels, celts, beads (excepting the mound D, feature 35, 
specimen), and pendants. 

From an analysis of the pottery at Bynum (see pottery section) 
it can be postulated fairly definitely that mound D was the earliest 
of the three main mounds. It is interesting to note then that 
it was mound D which yielded up the example of a lead-filled 
spool in which both sides were lead filled. Mound B likewise had 
one spool, both sides of which were lead filled and one spool of 
which only one side was filled, while the remaining two spools 
of mound B had no lead filling whatsoever. Mound A on the 
other hand had four spools, none of which possessed lead filling. 
The pottery analysis indicated but did not show definitely that 
mound A was slightly antecedent to mound B. The spools from 
mound B are not only of both types as found in mounds A and 
D but of an intermediate type (half-filled) also. Why the earliest 
form should be the completely lead-filled one is unknown. 
Possibly the practice of filling them with lead was discontinued 
if the source of lead was no longer obtainable. If these spools had 
been found associated with the region of the ears, it could be 
postulated that the extra weight of the lead became unbearable, 
but that theory does not hold at least for Bynum since none of 
the spools were so associated. 

Miscellaneous copper. A fragment of rolled sheet copper was 
also found in the crematory pit of mound D. The roll is slightly 
conical at one end and measures 1.5 centimeters by 1.1 centimeters 
wide. Evidently this is a small rolled piece of sheet copper such 
as was used in making the copper spools. There is the possibility 
that the Bynum Indians traded for the raw copper or for copper 
in sheet form and then manufactured their own artifacts as well 
as trading directly for the finished product. 

A small piece of rolled copper sheeting with one end bent over 
into a knob was found in the village area 0.3 foot below the sur- 
face. It was unassociated with any other object. The copper 
itself is in a fair state of preservation (better than much of the 
copper from the mounds), and, while it is possible that this piece 
is prehistoric, its general condition, appearance, and lack of asso- 
ciation make it more probable that this is a fragment from a 
recent historic tool. 

GALENA 

Several samples of raw galena were recovered from the Bynum 
excavations. Only one of these was associated with the mounds, 
and that was a group of small fragments (eight in all) which 
were found on the west rim of feature 8 in mound B. The larg- 
est of these fragments is 7 by 5 by 3 millimeters and the smallest 
is 4.5 by 2 by 0.7 millimeters. Very probably at one time these 
eight fragments fitted together into one larger piece. 

A much larger spherical piece of galena was recovered from 
within the large circle pattern of feature 21 at a depth of 0.3 foot 
from the surface. It measures 2.3 by 2 by 1.7 centimeters. 

A very large rectanguloid piece of galena was recovered from 
the surface of the village site, unassociated with mound or feature. 
It measures 5 by 4.5 by 3.1 centimeters. 

The use of galena in connection with some of the spools from 
Bynum has already been noted. (See subsection on copper 
spools). Other than this, no use of the galena was observed at 



39 



Bynum, the pieces found being crude lumps. By its occurrence 
in the copper spools, the use of lead seems to be early at Bynum. 
Barite boat-shaped bars are noted in Adena. 

Barite (barium sulphate) occurs in outcrop veins in central Kentucky and 
usually carries with it a considerable percentage of galena (lead sulphide) 
and "black jack" (zinc sulphide) (Webb, 1945, pp. 89-90). 

Galena is also reported from Copena sites in northern Alabama 
where it is found mainly as unformed lumps. A few galena beads 
are the only artifacts of this nature reported (Dejarnette, op. cit., 
p. 17). However, many of the galena balls are quite large. In 
the Copena site of Hn°4 in Alabama, 44 chunks of galena were 
found of varying size. The smallest weight was 16 ounces, the 
largest weight 5.8 pounds (Webb, 1942, p. 39). The largest piece 
from Bynum weighs 1354 ounces. 



STONE 

Lithic material at the Bynum site may be divided into flaked 
and ground artifacts. Neither was plentiful, the majority of the 
flaked specimens being represented by projectile points, and 
ground specimens by the greenstone celts of feature 8, mound B. 
The over-all paucity of stone implements at this site is in itself 
of prime significance, strongly indicating, especially in the ab- 
sence of bone, antler, or shell artifacts, a reliance upon wooden 
implements in prehistoric times and upon trade goods in the early 
nineteenth century. The complete absence of such forms as stone 
pipes, stone hoes, figurines, paint palettes, placques, shaft straight- 
eners, balls, plummet stones, bar gorgets, cannel coal disks, and 
any evidence of intentional breakage of artifacts deposited with 
burials must share significance with the presence of the forms to 
be described. Table 23 gives a summation of provenience, and 
table 24 measurements of Bynum lithic artifacts. 

Flawed stone. All points at Bynum fall into two categories, 
stemmed and stemless, if two points with deep lateral basal 
notches are classed as stemmed. The stemmed points are divided 
into (A) flared stem grading into barbed shoulders, base slightly 
to markedly convex, sides curved, length averaging 8.4 centi- 
meters, represented by the 19 points of feature 8, mound B (pi. 5, 
figs. 1-4, inclusive), and (B) the smaller, simple haft points with 
elongate form, average 5 centimeters long, sloping shoulders, stem 
tapering or rounded, associated with the village site (pi. 10, figs. 
18, 22, 23, and 24). An expanding stem variant (C) seen in plate 
13, figure 3, may also be termed a side-notched point, since the 
stem expands almost to the width of the shoulders below the 
lateral basal notches. The stemless points are characteristically 
triangular and small (D). This type averages 2.2 centimeters 
long, with straight bases. Only two straight-sided square-based 
points (E), from the village site, are recorded. 

These five distinct types can be found repeatedly illustrated in 
reports on southeastern and central-eastern archeology. The type 
described under (A) was reported by Lewis and Kneberg as 
Hamilton stemmed points associated with the Hamilton Focus of 
the Middle Valley aspect in eastern Tennessee (Lewis and Kne- 
berg, 1946, plate 65C, two points at upper right corner). Points 



of the Copena Focus of the Pickwick Basin in Alabama have little 
in common with this type, Webb reporting "broad-stemmed 
points" corresponding to several Bynum type A specimens from 
Lu v 65 only (Webb, 1942, p. 304). Oddly enough, two shell mid- 
den mounds of this area, Lu°5 and Lu°67, yielded points closely 
matching type A (Webb, 1942, pi. 36-1 and 227-2, No. 10). It 
is interesting that Quimby illustrates a type closely corresponding 
to A from the Norton Component of the Goodall Focus in Michi- 
gan and lists "ovate, corner-notched flint points" of this type from 
the Hopewellian components designated Brooks, Sumnerville, 
Marantette and Goodall of the Goodall Focus in Michigan and 
Indiana (Quimby, 1941, p. 151, and pi. 5). It may be of sig- 
nificance that corner-notched points are one of the determinants 
of the Woodland Pattern. 

Type B, the elongated points with sloping shoulders and taper- 
ing or rounded stem, is reported by Jennings for MLe-14, 18, and 
90 in the Chickasaw Old Fields of Lee County, Miss., and from 
the Miller I Culture sites MLe-53, 56, and 62, all in Lee County, 
Miss. (Jennings, 1941, p. 7a and c), and by Coilins for the Deason- 
ville site in Yazoo County, Miss. (Collins, 1932, pi. 9, k, m, p, 
and q). The presence of type B at sites where cordmarked pottery 
is found, notably the Miller Culture sites and Collins' Deasonville 
site, may indicate a link with these pottery types in a pre-Chicka- 
saw horizon. Webb's types 6, and 8, and 16 in the Pickwick 
Basin show likeness in form to type B at Bynum, as cited in the 
following Alabama shell middens: CU42, Ct°27, Lu°67, Lu°6i, 
Lu°59, and Lu°5. Only one Copena site, Lu v 65, had a com- 
parable point (Webb, 1942). In the Wheeler Basin of Alabama, 
Webb reported stemmed points of the general type B shape from 
one Copena mound La°i4 and many from the Lu°86 and La 16 
shell middens and the Lu°85 village site (Webb, 1939). In 
Louisiana, type B points are approximated in several of the simple 
haft types at the Marksville period Crooks site (Ford and Willey, 
1940, pp. 94-100, and figs. 45 and 46). Similar simple haft points 
are also reported from Tehefuncte sites (Ford and Quimby, 1945, 
pp. 32, 33, and fig. 8). 

Type C points with definite side notch are not common, ap- 
parently, in the Southeast except in Kentucky shell heaps. A 
specimen of this type is illustrated for Hn°i in the Pickwick Basin 
of Alabama (Webb, 1942, pi. 10) and for La°i4 in the Wheeler 
Basin (Webb, 1939, pi. 52a). Specimens closer to type C at 
Bynum are reported for the Deasonville site in Yazoo County, 
Miss. (Collins, 1932, pi. 9). 

Type D at Bynum (pi. 13, figs. 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, and 9) is typical of 
the Chickasaw Old Field sites of Lee County, Miss. This tri- 
angular small point is associated with the Chickasaw by Jennings 
who states that it is the only form which continued to be made 
after strong European contact. Webb reports small triangular 
points from the Pickwick Basin sites with Moundville-like com- 
ponents, Lu v 92, Hn°i, Lu°2i, Lu°59, and Lu°25. 

Type E, the projectile or knife with tapering point and slightly 
expanding straight base (pi. 10, fig. 19) from the village sur- 
face has some resemblance to the Copena blades illustrated by 
Webb for the Lu v 65 and Hn°4 sites (Webb, 1942, pis. 29-1 
and 207. 



40 



Knives at Bynum were exclusively associated with the village 
site, one from a pit and two from post molds, the remaining six 
from the surface. Complete knives were uniformly leaf-shaped 
with squarish to straight bases. The average length was 5.1 centi- 
meters (pi. 10, fig. 21). This type of knife is so universal that 
site comparisons seem hardly warranted. Although this type is 
seldom illustrated in site reports for Mississippi, Alabama, and 
Tennessee, it is described for almost all sites of the burial mound 
complex and earlier. 

Key type drills are represented by only two specimens (pi. 13, 
figs. 6, and 7) both from the village surface; hence, these have 
little diagnostic value in the absence of association. Key drills 
apparently are not common in the Marksville sites of the Lower 
Mississippi area. They are, however, reported at Lu°5q and 
Lu°25, both shell midden sites, and at Hn°i, a sand mound with 
both shell midden and Moundville traits, all in the Pickwick Basin 
(Webb, 1942, pis. 10, 93, and 159). 

Flaked scrapers, so dominant in a true hunting complex, are 
remarkable for their rarity at Bynum. The four elongated side 
scrapers on flakes, all from the village site, are undeveloped except 
for the simple retouching on one lateral edge and traces of retouch 
on the opposite edge (pi. 13, figs. 10 and 11). This type is not 
prominent in southeastern sites of the burial mound horizon. 
Jennings describes none in his Lee County, Miss., sites. Collins 
mentions side scrapers from the Deasonville site but not in quan- 
tity. The Marksville period Crooks site in Louisiana yielded 
some side scrapers, but these are much wider and more developed 
in flaking than those at Bynum (Ford and Willey, 1940, p. 104). 
Webb mentions a very few from his Copena sites. 

The two end scrapers, one from the fill of mound A (pi. 13, 
fig. 15), and the other from the village surface, are on flakes 
and show a well-developed "snub-nosed" retouch on the thick 
end. This type is rarely noted for burial mound sites throughout 
the Southeast, one of the few examples reported being type 4 at 
the Crooks site (Ford and Willey, 1940, p. 105). 

Ground stone. The 32 polished celts, 29 from mound B, repre- 
sent varieties of "greenstone," generally a metamorphic schistose 
rock from the piedmont of Alabama or further north. In form 
and material these celts are comparable to many finds made in 
Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, and Tennessee. In Mississippi, 
Ford reports "smooth ground celts, usually greenstone" from all 
of the Big Black River series of sites in Hinds and Madison 
Counties, Miss., as well as from Ford's former Deasonville com- 
plex (Ford, 1936, pp. 128, 141). 

Celts were rarely encountered in Lee County, Miss., by Jen- 
nings, who found one apiece at MLe-14, 18, and 90. These sites, 
however, were in the historic horizon, and the celts are small and 
poor in workmanship. At the Crooks mound in La Salle Parish, 
La., seven ground celts, none with burials, were reported (Ford 
and Willey, 1940, p. no). 

In southern Alabama, two greenstone celts are reported for 
the McQuorquodale mound (Wimberley and Tourtelot, 1941, p. 
12). In northern Alabama, two greenstone celts were reported 
from Ma v io (Webb and Dejarnette, 1948, p. 31). In the Pick- 
wick Basin of northern Alabama, Webb reports greenstone celts 



among the Copena traits of Lu°5, Lu°2i, Lu°25, Lu°54, Lu v 65, and 
Lu v 92. In the same basin in Tennessee, greenstone celts charac- 
terized Hn"4 (Webb, 1942, pp. 38, 42, 51, 88, 93, 175, 226). In 
the Wheeler Basin in northern Alabama greenstone celts and 
Copena traits are reported at La°37 and La"i4 (Webb, 1939, pp. 
51, 55). In Tennessee, Lewis and Kneberg report ground green- 
stone celts from the Hamilton, Hiwasse Island and Dallas com- 
ponents (Lewis and Kneberg, 1946; and personal communication, 
1949). 

Thus, a significant Copena-Marksville-Deasonville trait is mani- 
fested by the greenstone polished celts extending into the Hope- 
wellian phase in southern Alabama. At Bynum, this trait is 
strongly in evidence, representing the principal ground stone 
artifact type. It is interesting to note that a miniature celt of poor 
workmanship was found in a rectangular pit overlying the post 
mold patterns of Feature 24 and associated with the Chickasaw 
burials of historic time. This tiny celt (pi. 7, fig. 4), is also of 
greenstone and polished, suggesting that this may represent the 
end product of a long tradition of ceremonial polished celts. 

A single sandstone celt, partly polished, came from the village 
surface. 

Aside from the celts, the only other polished stone artifacts are 
one red slate fragment, probably of a rectangular pendant, with 
a single hole drilled from one side at one end and a fragment of 
a hematite chunky stone. Both fragments were found on the 
village surface. 

Metates, or mortar stones, manos, or hand grinders, and pitted, 
or nut stones, constitute the unpolished stone category. 

Of the 18 slab mortar fragments, 15 were from the village sur- 
face, 1 from mound A surface, 1 from mound B surface, and 1 
0.3 foot below the sod line in mound D fill. The fragments in- 
dicate that these implements were uniformly small sandstone slabs 
4 to 7 inches in diameter. They were not worn deeply, the sur- 
face being in most cases only slightly concave. Not only at 
Bynum, but at virtually all recorded Burial mound I sites in the 
Southeast, slab mortars are shallow, small, and few in number. 
There are bare representations at MLe-62, the Miller horizon site, 
and the Chickasaw Old Field sites of Lee County, Miss. (Jennings, 
1941, pp. 184, 203), at the Tehefuncte site in Louisiana (Ford 
and Quimby, 1945, fig. 11), and the McQuorquodale mound in 
southern Alabama (Wimberly and Tourtelot, 1941 , p. 14). In 
the Dallas and Hamilton focus components of Tennessee, mortars 
are "present but rare" (Lewis and Kneberg, 1946, pp. 170, 178). 
Webb reports several "lapstones" from the Copena site Lu v 65 in 
the Pickwick Basin of Alabama and also from four shell middens 
of that area, but it is not certain whether these may be considered 
mortars or pitted stones (Webb and Dejarnette, 1942, pp. 
304, 312). 

Of the 10 small loaf-shaped sandstone hand grinders, 8 were 
complete, and all were from the village surface except 1 complete 
specimen from 0.4 foot above the central pit floor, Feature 8, 
of mound B, lying in basal fill (pi. 7, fig. 5). 

Manos as such are rarely mentioned in the literature of south- 
eastern sites, although their presence at many burial mound sites 
is indicated. Some confusion has arisen from the fact that "ham- 



41 



merstones" and some small rounded pitted or nut stones fre- 
quently have smoothed surfaces that qualify them equally as 
hand grinders or manos. Thus, unpitted hammerstones from 
the Crooks site, the Lee County, Miss., Miller sites, the McQuor- 
quodale mound, the Tchefuncte site, Deasonville site, and 
Hamilton and Dallas components of Tennessee may have served 
more than one purpose. In every instance, however, their scarcity 
indicates that the use of grinding stones was unimportant to the 
builders of burial mounds. 

Of 12 specimens of pitted stones, flattened, lozenge to loaf- 
shaped, with pits on both sides, 9 were complete (pi. 7, figs. 5, 6, 
8, 9, 10). The use of these problematical implements, also 
termed "nut stones" and occasionally "lapstones" or "pitted ham- 
merstones," seems characteristic at the burial mound I sites of the 
Southeast, although the use of this form is not restricted to them. 
The purpose to which pitted stones were put is problematical. 
The multiplicity of possible uses is apparent: Nut crackers, drill 
sockets, molds for beating out metal (even the concave copper 
spool may have been so fashioned, as pointed out in Squier and 
Davis, 1848, p. 206), finger grips, paint mortars, gaming de- 
vices — to name a few. 

At the Miller I site MLe-62, Lee County, Miss., Jennings re- 
ports "numerous smoothly pitted nut stones, pitted and unpitted 
hammerstones" (1941, p. 203). Pitted hammerstones are de- 
scribed from the Marksville Crooks site (Ford and Willey, p. 
no), and "finger grip hammerstones" are listed at Deasonville 
(Collins, 1932, p. 20). Certain "lapstones" at the McQuor- 
quodale site in southern Alabama may qualify as pitted stones 
since they are described as "slabs of hemataceous sandstone pitted 
without additional shaping." Some, however, "have been ground 
on the edges." A nutting stone is also illustrated. (Wimberly 
and Tourtelot, 1941, p. 14.) Pitted stones are reported in the 
Pickwick Basin at the Copena site Lu v 65, the sand mound Hn°i 
and in several shell middens (Webb, 1942, pp. 304, 312, and pi. 
n). For the Tennessee Hamilton component, nut stones are 
reported (Lewis and Kneberg, 1946, p. 118). 



RAW MATERIALS 

The material used for flaked implement making may be desig- 
nated flint according to the broad usage of the term. Specifically 
the flaked artifacts represent a variety of gray, tan, brown, and 



red cherts, chalcedonys, and some jaspers. Only significant differ- 
ences will be noted here. 

The materials used for the 19 spear points of Feature 8, Mound 
B, were dark-gray chert except for three specimens of light-gray 
and mottled chalcedony. The chalcedony suggests Flint Ridge, 
Ohio; the dark-gray chert is comparable to a material familiar in 
the Tennessee River basins. 

Materials of flaked artifacts at the village site are markedly 
different, being chiefly reddish-brown cherts and a few jaspers. 
Most of these materials are recognizable in local chert pebbles 
from cretaceous gravels. 

Sandstones used for the pitted stones, slab mortars, and manos 
are local and show a characteristically heavy iron content. Green- 
stone has been described under "celts" above. 



CONCLUSIONS 

Lithic forms associated with the central features of mounds B 
and D are unlike the lithic implements of the village site. Mate- 
rials of these respective forms are likewise different, those of 
mound artifacts having come from northern Alabama or Ten- 
nessee and those of the village site being predominantly local. 

The forms of flaked points of feature 8, mound B, are not charac- 
teristically Copena but correspond to corner-notched and expand- 
ing-stemmed points which are associated with Hopewellian com- 
ponents and the lithic determinants of the Woodland pattern 
further north. However, the presence of clustered points in sub- 
floor burial pits is a Copena trait, likewise the greenstone celts of 
mounds B and D. 

Celts from the mounds, flaked stone artifacts and ground stone 
metates, manos, and pitted stones from the village site tend defi- 
nitely to correspond to like types of Marksville Deasonville- 
Copena sites. Similarities in lithic artifacts from cord and fabric- 
marked pottery sites in foci of the Hopewellian phase are im- 
pressive. The lithic correspondence between prehistoric Bynum 
and the McQuorquodale mound site of southern Alabama are 
marked (as well as mound structure and copper spool aspects). 
It is noteworthy that both sites are on the drainage of the Tombig- 
bee River. Linkage of trade and influence from the Great Lakes 
to the Mississippi Delta as further indicated by lithic compari- 
sons was probably oriented along the complex of trails which ulti- 
mately became associated with the Natchez Trace route. 



42 



Specialists Reports 



SKELETAL MATERIAL 
by Dr. Marshall T. Newman, Division of Physical Anthropology, United States National Museum 



Skeletal material from the Bynum excavations was submitted 
to Dr. Marshall T. Newman of the National Museum. We are 
indebted to Dr. Newman for the following analysis and discus- 
sion of this material, published by permission of the Secretary 
of the Smithsonian Institution. 

The largely fragmentary skeletal remains from 27 excavated 
graves at the Bynum site form the basis of this report. Frag- 
mentary as most of them are, they provide the first impres- 
sions — viewed through time — of the aboriginal populations of 
Mississippi. The only other published researches on the physical 
anthropology of the Indians from this State are Hrdlicka's pub- 
lished measurements on 56 skulls (Hrdlicka 1940, pp. 407-416), 
of which 38 came from archeologically undocumented graves 
"near Vicksburg"; and Collins' (1925, 1928) measurements on 
130 living and racially mixed Choctaw from near Philadelphia, 
Miss. Hrdlicka's data for Mississippi and adjacent states in- 
dicate a round-headed Indian population in which head defor- 
mation was common, often in pronounced form. The time dur- 
ing which this population occupied the area is not stated, but it 
is likely that the bulk of the skulls came from the later (Temple 
mound I or II) sites. In the present study, those skulls of 
Hrdlicka's series from sites of cultures known to the authors have 
been reexamined and these findings are incorporated with the 
discussion of the Bynum series. (See p. 45.) 

METHODS 

The assessment of sex was made, where possible, from the en- 
tire skeleton, especially the skull and pelvis. In a number of in- 
stances, sex could only be hazarded, because of the very fragmen- 
tary nature of the specimens in question. The racial type was 
determined by observation, using comparable types from else- 
where in the Southeast as a guide. Neither Hrdlicka's nor Neu- 
mann's type names are wholly satisfactory, but they are used here 
in preference to devising new ones. Hrdlicka used the terms 
"Algonkin" and "Gulf," respectively, for the long-headed and 
round-headed peoples in the eastern United States. Neumann's 
terms for essentially these same types are "Silvid" and "Centralid" 
(Neumann, 194 1). Cranial deformation was assessed according 
to the types defined by Neumann (1941). 

The cranial measurements and indices listed in table 25 and 
the observations mentioned in the text were taken according to 



techniques previously outlined (Newman, 1947, appendixes A 
and B). Long bone lengths were measured in standard fashion 
on an osteometric board. Tibial length excludes the spine. Mid- 
shaft circumferences were taken with a cloth tape. In assessing 
tooth wear, the following scale was used: 

First degree — slight enamel wear. 
Second degree — dentine visible. 
Third degree — all enamel worn off surface. 
Fourth degree — pulp cavities exposed. 

MATERIALS 

The following is an inventory of the skeletal material by burial 
number: 

Floor of mound A 

No. 1. Very fragmentary but partially restorable skull; fragmentary bones 
of the upper limb; fragmentary ribs; atlas. Middle-aged female. 

No. 2. Over 12 small calcined fragments of skull vault; one cap of a 
permanent molar. Dr. T. D. Stewart pointed out that these tooth caps, 
especially those showing wear and therefore fully erupted, are the result of 
post-mortem decay of the roots and other tooth surfaces not covered with 
enamel. 

No. 3. Small, heavily calcined vault fragments; cap of a permanent molar. 

No. 4. Small, calcined fragments of skull; several teeth, one of which 
is the cap of a permanent molar. 

Floor of mound B 

No. 5. Fragments of parietals and occiput. Rugged adult male. 

No. 6. Numerous calcined bone fragments, of which those recognizably 
human arc the right zygomatic process of the temporal, the body of a 
cervical vertebra, and six vault fragments. 

These bones were sent to the Division for examination in 1947. In re- 
porting upon them, Dr. T. D. Stewart stated that judging by the consolidated 
bony fragments under highly baked clay, the bones were first covered by 
clay and then fires built on the latter. Also indicative of this is the fact 
that only several fragments of bone appear to have been in direct contact 
with the fire. 

No. 7. Heavily calcined mass of bone fragments, recognizable as human 
only by several vault fragments. 

No. 9. Over 12 calcined bone fragments, with one identifiably human 
piece of occiput. 

No. in. Calcined fragments of long bones, not recognizably human, but 
probably so. 

No. 28. Heavily calcined and shattered bone fragments not recognizable 
as human, but probably so. 

No. 29. About 24 very small calcined bone fragments, recognizable as 
human only by a small portion of mandible. 



891131 O— 51- 



43 



Prehistoric village site (no artifacts were found in association with these 
burials, so their cultural position is uncertain. Since only cultural 
materials pertaining to Burial Mound 1 and to the 1820-30 Chickasaw 
reoccupation are present at the Bynum site, it is assumed here that these 
burials pertain to the former. They could be earlier or later than the 
construction of the mounds) 

No. 8. Part of occipital and other skull fragments; two thoracic and one 
lumbar vertebrae. Middle-aged adult, sex indeterminable. 

No. 11. Very fragmentary but partially restorable skull and most of the 
long bones. Subadult female. 

No. 12. Small fragments of skull vault thick enough to represent an 
adult individual, along with the caps of 10 permanent teeth. 

No. 14. Small fragments of a skull and two caps of permanent teeth. 
Adult male. 

No. 15. Small skull fragments and eroded shaft sections of humerus and 
femur. 

No. 16. Fragmentary but partially restorable skull; part of mandible; most 
of long bones. Young adult male. 

No. 21. Posterior part of skull; mandible; two vertebrae; and acromial 
process of a scapula. Probably adult female. 

No. 23. Right half of skull; mandible; most skeletal parts except vertebral 
column. Middle-aged male. (See pi. 19.) 

No. 24. Most skeletal parts (skull missing). Female over 25 years of 
pge, on basis of fusion of sternal epiphyses of clavicle. 

No. 26. Fragmentary skull and most skeletal parts. Child about 6 
years old. 

Historic Chickasaw reoccupation {1820-30) 

No. 17. Fragmentary skull; mandible; and long bones. Child about 6 years 
old. 

No. 18. Intact skull; mandible; and most skeletal parts. Middle-aged to 
old male. (See pi. 19.) 

No. 19. Intact skull; mandible; and an almost complete skeleton. Young 
adult female. (See pi. 20.) 

No. 20. Fragmentary but partially restorable skull; mandible; and most 
skeletal parts. Adult female. 

No. 22. Fragmentary skull; mandible; and most skeletal parts, except 
thoracic and lumbar vertebrae. Middle-aged adult, probably male. 

No. 25. Skull fragments and skeletal parts. Child 2 or 3 years old. 



DESCRIPTION 

Only the skeletal material from 13 burials is sufficiently intact 
to merit detailed description. Measurements of these specimens 
are given in tables 25 and 26, and descriptions of them follow. 



FLOOR OF MOUND A 

Burial No. 1 {middle-aged female). This fragmentary skull 
appears to be of the Centralid (or Gulf) type, and shows fronto- 
vertico-occipital deformation of a pronounced degree. The frontal 
pressure extended down almost to the nasofrontal suture, radi- 
cally reducing the form and size of the brow ridges, thoroughly 
flattening the glabellar region, and eliminating any nasion de- 
pression. Other morphological features which were affected by 
the deformation are the pronounced parietal bosses, medium 
temporal fullness and a small-sized mound-type occipital torus. 
The remaining observable characters, probably uninfluenced by 
the deformation, are: Shallow glenoid fossae, oval auditory 
meatus, medium tympanic plates, and shallow inframaxillary 



notches. Of the teeth, none were lost before death, although nine 
were lost post mortem. Tooth wear is third degree, one of the 
remaining teeth is carious, but no abscesses are present. 



PREHISTORIC VILLAGE SITE 

Burial No. 8 (adult, sex indeterminable). The narrow, bi- 
laterally "pinched" occiput suggests the Silvid (or Algonkin) 
physical type, although the fragmentary nature of the remains pre- 
cludes categorical assessment. There is a small mid-line flattened 
area on the occiput, but not enough to denote artificial deforma- 
tion with any certainty. 

Burial No. 11 (subadult female). The partially restorable 
calva of this specimen is sufficiently intact to permit a type assess- 
ment of Silvid. No deformation is apparent. Observable mor- 
phological features of note are: Small, divided-type brow ridges; 
small glabella, medium forehead height and slope; slight postor- 
bital constriction; small frontal bosses; very slight nasion depres- 
sion; medio-bilateral chin form; slight chin projection; and me- 
dium gonial flare. No teeth were lost during life, but eight are 
missing post mortem. Of the remaining teeth, no caries or apical 
abscesses are apparent, and tooth wear is of first degree. Of spe- 
cial note is a tripartite Inca bone, with osteoporotic pitting. 

Burial No. 16 (young adult male). The skull is definitely 
Silvid, with an approximate length-breadth index of 70-71. 
Whereas there is a small flattened area on the occiput, it must be 
classed as, at the most, very slight deformation. Application of 
Pearson's formula e to the left femoral and tibial lengths indicates 
an approximate stature of 167 centimeters. Morphological fea- 
tures of interest are: Small, divided-type brow ridges; low fore- 
head of pronounced slope and small frontal bosses; medium tem- 
poral fullness; medium occipital curve and form; small, mound- 
type occipital torus, and shallow suborbital fossae. Of the teeth, 
none were lost before death, nine afterward. The remaining 
teeth show only one case of caries, no abscesses, and second-degree 
wear. Of pathological interest are the shallow and eroded 
glenoid fossae, slight lipping of the lumbar vertebrae, and a well- 
healed fracture of the distal articular surface of the right tibia. 
The first two pathological processes may be of an arthritic nature. 

Burial No. 21 (middle-aged adult, probably female). The par- 
tial skull has a round-headed appearance, and may be either a 
Centralid type or may represent the more brachycephalic end of 
the Silvid range. Skulls similar to this one occasionally turned 
up in early, sometimes pre-pottery strata, in the Tennessee Valley 
excavations in northern Alabama, and presented problems which 
our techniques of morphological typing were insufficiently sen- 
sitive to solve. The skull of burial No. 21 shows a slight degree 
of symmetrical occipital flattening. There is a definite flattened 
area on the occiput just below lambda. Morphological features 
worth noting are: Small mastoid processes, and a small mound- 
form occipital torus; medium temporal fullness, sphenoid depres- 
sion, and occipital curve; high position of lambda; broad occiput 
(as viewed from norma verticalis); medio-bilateral chin form, 
with medium chin projection and alveolar prognathism; and 



44 



lateral and inferior thicknings of the body of the mandible, mak- 
ing for a "rocker-type" lower jaw. Only one tooth was lost dur- 
ing life, and wear is extreme (fourth degree). Exposure of the 
pulp cavities of four teeth caused caries and extensive apical 
abscesses. In one case, an apical abscess had penetrated the 
maxillary sinus. 

Burial No. 23 {middle-aged adult male). The skeleton rep- 
resents a short (about 160.4 centimeters) gracile individual of 
Silvid type. Cranial deformation is definitely absent. Of the 
more noteworthy cranial observations are the following: Ovoid 
skull form; small divided type brow ridges; small glabella, frontal 
and parietal bosses; medium median frontal crest and sagittal 
elevation; flat temporals; large mastoid processes and medium 
occipital torus of mound type; rhomboid-type orbits of medium in- 
clination; medium suborbital fossae with no inframaxillary notch; 
pronounced anterior and medium lateral malar projection; slight 
nasal depression; concave nasal profile; dull nasal sills; medium 
total, midfacial and alveolar prognathism; hyperbolic palate of 
medium height and a medium mound-type palatine torus; wide 
bilateral chin form, with chin projection neutral; pronounced ever- 
sion of gonial angles and shovel-shaped upper central incisors. 
No teeth were lost during life, and only one is missing post 
mortem. Wear is second degree, one tooth is carious, and two 
abscesses are present. Bite is edge to edge. 

Burial No. 24 {adult female over 25 years of age). Physical 
type cannot be determined, due to the very fragmentary nature of 
the skull. The application of stature reconstruction formulae to 
the long bones indicates an approximate stature of about 154.5 
centimeters. 

Burial No. 26 {child about 6 years of age). Physical type 
cannot be determined. The absence of any flattening on the 
occiput probably places this specimen in the undeformed category. 



HISTORIC CHICKASAW REOCCUPATION (1820-30) 

Burial No. iy {child about 6 years of age). — Physical type can- 
not be determined. There is a suggestion of cranial deformation 
on a piece of occipital bone. 

Burial No. 18 {middle-age to old male). — The skull is def- 
initely of Centralid type, with a length-breadth index of 79.8. 
It also shows lambdoid deformation of a slight degree, which 
could very well be natural rather than artificial. This slight 
amount of deformation probably had no effect on the cranial 
diameters. Stature was approximately 178.5 centimeters. The 
more interesting of the cranial observations are: Sphenoid skull 
form; medium divided type brow ridges; medium glabella and 
frontal bosses; low forehead height and medium forehead slope; 
pronounced postorbital constriction; no median frontal crest but 
a large sagittal elevation; medium to pronounced temporal full- 
ness; large mastoid processes and a large mound-form occipital 
torus; pronounced occipital curve and a low position of lambda; 
rhomboid-shaped orbits of medium inclination; medium sub- 
orbital fossae with deep inframaxillary notches; pronounced an- 
terior and lateral malar projection; small nasion depression with 



a high nasal angle; slightly concavo-convex nasal profile; large 
nasal spine; medium total and midfacial prognathism but pro- 
nounced alveolar prognathism of both maxilla and mandible; 
medio-bilateral chin form with neutral projection; pronounced 
eversion of gonial angles, and medium shovel-shaped upper cen- 
tral incisors. Of the dentition, nine teeth were lost during life, 
with only two missing post mortem. The antemortem loss was 
such that in life this individual had only one set of opposing 
molars. Of the remaining teeth, nine are heavily decayed, and 
two of these gave rise to small apical abscesses. Only stubby shells 
of the root structure of the left Pm 1 and right Pm 2 were left. 
The lower right Pm 2 and M 2 show large gaping cavities. Tooth 
wear is second degree and there is a slight overbite. Of path- 
ological interest is a well-healed fracture near the tip of the nasal 
bones. 

Burial No. jg {young adult female). This skeleton represents 
a short (154.6 centimeters), light-boned female of Centralid type, 
with a length-breadth index of 81.6. A slight amount of lamb- 
doid deformation is present, but is more likely natural than arti- 
ficial. Cranial observations of note are: Sphenoid head form, 
with a pinched occiput and low lambda position; small divided- 
type brow ridges; small glabella with a very slight nasal depres- 
sion below; medium forehead height and slope; no median 
frontal crest; a medium sagittal elevation; medium frontal and 
pariltal bosses; medium temporal fullness and mastoid processes; 
medium mound-form occipital torus; square orbits of medium in- 
clination; medium suborbital fossae with small inframaxillary 
notches; pronounced total, midfacial and alveolar prognathism; 
U-shaped palate with a constriction in the premolar region; me- 
dian chin form with negative (receding) chin projection. Two 
teeth were lost during life; none after death. Eleven teeth were 
heavily attacked by caries, with five reduced to the shells of 
root stumps, which led in each case to prominent apical abscesses. 
Tooth wear is first degree, and there is a slight overbite. 

Burial No. 20 {middle-aged adult female). The skull is of 
Silvid type, with a tentative length-breadth index of 74.7. Ap- 
proximate stature was 15 1.5 centimeters. Cranial deformation is 
definitely absent. Morphological features of particular interest 
are: Ovoid skull form; small mastoid processes; pronounced occipi- 
tal curve; high lambda position; medium occipital form; small 
mound-form occipital torus; median chin form; pronounced 
alveolar prognathism of mandible; medium eversion of gonial 
angles. Two teeth were lost during life; two more post mortem. 
Two of the remaining teeth aie carious, and one large apical 
abscess is present. Tooth wear is first degree. 

Burial No. 22 {middle-aged adult male {?)). The skull is too 
fragmentary to permit type assessment. Stature was approxi- 
mately 161. 5 centimeters. Slight deformation on the right side 
of the occiput just above the supreme nuchal line is detectable 
from a warped fragment. Observational features of note on the 
skull are: Slight temporal fullness; large mastoid processes; me- 
dium mound-form occipital torus; shallow suborbital fossae; 
medium inframaxillary notch; slightly concavo-convex nasal pro- 
file; high nasal angle; pronounced alveolar prognathism of maxil- 
lar and mandible; parabolic palate; medio-bilateral chin form, with 



45 



neutral chin projection; pronounced eversion of gonial angles. 
No teeth were lost ante or post mortem. Six teeth are carious, 
but no apical abscesses resulted. Tooth wear is first degree. Bite 
is edge to edge. 

DISCUSSION 

PHYSICAL TYPE 

Morphological typing of nine of the previously discussed skulls 
give the following listing by archaeological provenience: 
Floor of mound A: One Centralid (No. i). 
Prehistoric village site: Four Silvids (Nos. 8, n, 16, 23), one 

indeterminate (No. 21). 
Historic Chickasaw: Two Centralids (Nos. 18, 19), one Sil- 
vid (No. 20). 

The evidence from the floor of mound A, scanty as it is, sug- 
gests the presence of the Centralid physical type in northeastern 
Mississippi in burial mound I times. This is as early in the 
cultural sequence of the eastern United States as this round- 
headed physical type has been reported. The most conclusive 
evidence of the presence of Centralids in Burial Mound I times 
comes from the Adena sites of Kentucky and adjacent areas 
(Webb and Snow, 1945, esp., pp. 247-263), whereas the earlier 
inhabitants of the Southeast, assigned to the prepottery Archaic 
period, were largely a small-sized variant of the Silvid physical 
type. 

Nine other fragmentary skulls from Mississippi — possibly from 
the same Burial Mound I cultural level as the Bynum site — came 
from near Crandall, Clarke County (U. S. N. M. 331,046-054). 
The very incomplete nature of all these skulls precludes definite 
assessments. U. S. N. M. 331,047, -048, and -049 all present a 
broadish-headed appearance, and may represent the Centralid 
physical type. U. S. N. M. 331,046, -053, and -054 give a 
longer-headed impression, although the first-named has a length- 
breadth index of 80.7, and the last is represented only by an 
occiput which has the "pinched" appearance typical of Silvids. 

The long-headed Silvid skulls from the prehistoric village site 
contrast strongly with the lone Centralid buried in the floor of 
mound A, and may indicate a physical difference between the 
builders of the Bynum mound and the people who buried with- 
out artifacts in the village site. The scant data that can be de- 
rived from five fragmentary skulls preclude any more definite 
statement, and the existence of two physically different popula- 
tions at Bynum remains only a possibility. Judging by the physi- 
cal sequences outside Mississippi (Newman and Snow, ms.), the 
Bynum Silvids could, with equal facility, be considered earlier 
or later than the building of the mounds there. Or they could 
represent a serf group who were used by the moundbuilders of 
higher culture. 

In the historic Chickasaw burials, the presence of the round- 
headed Centralids is what one would expect. The one Silvid 
Skull (No. 20) should occasion no surprise since, to the writer's 
knowledge, a minority of this physical type showed up in historic 
burials from Guntersville Basin, northern Alabama. 



Other Mississippi skulls from the National Museum collections 
which can be assigned with good probability to the two Temple 
mound periods all appear to be Centralid. Notes on their physi- 
cal type and deformation follow: 

Temple mound I 

U. S. N. M. 349, 933 — from the Woodbine mound, Yazoo County; pre- 
sumably prehistoric Tunica, and possibly Temple mound I in period. 
Only the face, frontal and temporals are present, and a confident assessment 
of type is therefore impossible. The face looks Centralid rather than 
Silvid. The frontal shows a definite transverse "band" of deformation. 

Temple mound I or II 

U. S. N. M. 263, 405-406 — from Shadyside Landing, Washington County; 
shell-tempered pottery and effigy pipes reported from the site, which is 
more likely Temple mound II than I. Both skulls are definitely Centralid, 
and both show heavy fronto-vertico-occipital deformation. 

Temple mound II 

U. S. N. M. 326, 505—525 — from near Natchez, Jefferson County; probably 
late and usually assumed to be Natchez. Of 1 1 skulls sufficiently intact 
for assessment, all show Centralid physical traits, and all have fronto- 
vertico-occipital deformation, mostly pronounced in degree. 

U. S. N. M. 263, 403-404, 407 — from Commerce, Tunica County; red 
and white painted pottery, which used to be called Caddo, came from this 
site. No. 263, 403 is a definite Centralid, and shows pronounced fronto- 
parallelo-occipital deformation. No. 263, 404 is also Centralid in type, 
with pronounced fronto-vertico-occipital deformation. 

U. S. N. M. 331, 044—045 — from the Hiwaunee mound, Wayne County; 
this mound was the mythical place of origin of the Choctaw and hence 
is to be identified with that tribe as a late site. The two restored skulls 
look Centralid, but have rather "pinched" occiputs. Both show fronto- 
occipital deformation of a medium degree. 

U. S. N. M. 377, 995 — from near Tupelo, Lee County; the presence of 
white and yellow beads mark this burial as historic; the location makes 
it historic Chickasaw, with little doubt. The physical type of this speci- 
men is Centralid, with a length-breadth index of 78.18. Only a trace 
of occipital deformation is present. The skull is very similar in appear- 
ance to that of burial No. 19, except for greater prognathism in the 
latter. (See pi. 20.) 



CRANIAL DEFORMATION 

The skull of burial No. 1 from the floor mound A shows pro- 
nounced fronto-vertico-occipital deformation. Whether this form 
of deformation was the norm for the builders of the Bynum 
mound is impossible to say. Nine fragmentary skulls from the 
Crandall mound of the same period do not give the impression 
of heavy deformation, although seven of them show frontal flat- 
tening and the remaining two lack frontal bosses. All five occi- 
puts show some flattening — two slight, two medium and one pro- 
nounced. U. S. N. M. 331,046 and -049 show medium fronto- 
vertico-occipital deformation, while 331,047 shows this type in 
pronounced form. No. 331,048 shows bifrontal flattening. 

The six prehistoric village site skulls can properly be classed 
as undeformed, with the closest approach to appreciable deforma- 
tion to be seen in burial No. 21. This lack of deformation, how- 
ever, cannot be used as a time indicator, because both the Archaic 
period and the Burial Mound I and II Silvids from northern Ala- 
bama were almost wholly undeformed. 

The five historic Chickasaw skulls show no deformation really 
worthy of the name, and may be considered undeformed. As 



46 



such they are in distinct contrast to most of the Temple mound 
skulls from Mississippi briefly noted on p. 45. Taken as a 
group, these skulls show as high a frequency and intensity of 
fronto-occipital deformation as the writer has seen in the 
Southeast. 

So sometime within the historic period it seems likely that 
heavy cranial deformation passed out of style, for the Chickasaw 
at least. More probably this abandoning of a custom in vogue 
since Burial Mound I times did not occur before the early 19th 
century, when the native cultures in the Southeast were disinte- 
grating rapidly. 



DENTAL PATHOLOGY 

A contrast in the amount of tooth wear and caries is presented 
by the prehistoric village site and the historic Chickasaw denti- 
tions. Age for age, tooth wear was about one degree more severe 
among the prehistoric village site skulls, and caries about one- 
fifth as common. The considerable dental wear of this sample 
is almost as great as that seen in the early northern Alabama Sil- 
vids (Newman and Snow, ms.), where it was attributed to a 
heavy diet of gritty fare such as shellfish. While I do not care 
to venture too far into sheer speculation, I suggest that the food 
economy of the prehistoric village site people may have been very 
similar to that found among the Lauderdale focus Indians in 
northern Alabama (Webb and Dejarnette, 1942). 

As for the very striking difference in incidence of caries between 
the prehistoric and historic groups in question, two factors serve 
as an explanation. First, a valid operating principle, up to a 
point, is the more wear, the less the caries (Newman and Snow, 
1942, pp. 469-470). Given more wear among the prehistoric 
group, fewer caries would be a logical prediction. Second, the 
very carious dentitions of the historic Chickasaw specimens are 
probably a reflection of a dietary change for the worse brought 
about by cultural disintegration and encroachment of the Whites. 



SUMMARY 

This report is based upon the largely fragmentary skeletal re- 
mains from 27 burials at the Bynum site, 28 archeologically docu- 
mented skulls in the National Museum collections from elsewhere 



in Mississippi, and the scanty literature on the physical anthro- 
pology of the aborigines of that State. 

The one skull from the floor of mound A which is sufficiently 
intact to permit morphological typing probably represents a 
Centralid female, with pronounced fronto-vertical-occipital defor- 
mation. Nine other fragmentary skulls from an apparently sim- 
ilar Burial Mound I site in Clarke County show physical traits 
suggestive, for the most part, of the Centralid type. In addition, 
they all show some signs of cranial deformation, although pro- 
nounced in only one case. 

Four skulls from the artifactless village site burials represent the 
Silvid physical type, and show practicallv no cranial deformation. 
In addition, this group appears to be small and gracile in body 
build. They are characterized by considerable tooth wear, prob- 
ably resulting from a gritty (shellfish?) diet, and show very little 
dental caries. Their chronological position at the Bynum site is 
uncertain. Since their burials lack trade goods, they are assumed 
to be contemporaneous with the builders of the Bynum mounds, 
and hence Burial Mound I in time. That the previously men- 
tioned mound floor skull represents a Centralid, and the four 
prehistoric village site skulls are Silvid in type suggests that two 
Indian physical types were present at Bynum. If there was such 
a distinction in physical type between the builders of the mounds 
and those who buried in the village site, were these peoples con- 
temporaneous at Bynum, or which of them were earlier? Unfor- 
tunately the lack of cultural data for the prehistoric village site 
burials precludes a definite answer. The fact that elsewhere in 
the Southeast, Silvids were the prior population cannot be used 
to assign these village site burials to the pre-Bynum mounds time, 
because in northern Alabama at least, the Silvids were still there 
in Burial Mound II times. 

The three historic Chickasaw skeletons which can be morpho- 
logically typed show two Centralids and one Silvid. No defor- 
mation worthy of the name is apparent. Dental wear is quite 
slight, and caries are severe. Perhaps the severity of the dental 
caries is to be expected, considering the altered food habits of a 
remnant Indian group. The presence of Silvids among historic 
Muskogean-speakers has been noted before in northern Alabama, 
and may be due to increased movement and mingling of the tribes. 
In addition, the essentially mesocephalic position of the two Cen- 
tralids accords with Hrdlicka's view (1922, pp. 113-114) that 
the Seminoles, Creeks, Chickasaws, and others were more meso- 
cephalic, while the Choctaws, Natchez, Alabamas, and closely re- 
lated tribes were more round headed. 



47 



VEGETABLE MATERIAL 

by Volney H. Jones {University of Michigan) 



Samples of vegetal material, mostly charred, from the Bynum 
site were submitted to Mr. Volney H. Jones, Curator of Ethnology, 
Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, for identifi- 
cation. We are indebted to Mr. Jones for the following data 
listed according to provenience at the site. 



MOUND B 

Feature 8. Central subfloor pit (specifically the burned detritus pocket 
beneath the west rim of feature 8, designated feature 10). 

Honey locust seeds, Gleditsia triacanthos, 46 specimens, mostly frag- 
mentary, charred. 
Common cane, Arundinaria sp. (probably Arundinaria gigantea, a quan- 
tity of fragments, charred. Hickory nut, Carya sp., six fragments 
of shells, charred. 
Acorns, Quercus sp., 2 specimens, charred. 
Charcoal, probably from oak. 

Charcoal, probably honey locust Gleditsia triacanthos, 1.4 feet above 
floor in fill. 
Feature 9. Pinus sp. fragments, charred. 



VILLAGE SITE 

Feature 19. From plow line to one foot below, in post mold. Maypop 
or Passion Flower, Passiflora incarnata, a quantity of seeds. 

Feature iy, pit level HI. Charcoal, Pinus sp. indicated in fragments. 
Feature 27, fire pit. Charcoal, Hickory, Carya sp. and sweetgum, Liq- 
uidambar styracifiua indicated. 
Burials 24 and 26. 

Cane, Arundinaria gigantea indicated, charred fragments. 

Hickory units, Carya sp., a large quantity of shell fragments, charred. 



SUMMARIES 

Honey locust beans. These were found in five of the lots 
(3570C, 3574, 3575C, 3576D, and 3579D), all from the central 
pit (features 8 and 10) of mound B totaling about 46 seeds. At 
first glance these bear some resemblance to garden beans, so were 
checked very carefully. They compare very closely in every re- 
spect with seeds of the honey locust gathered at Ann Arbor. 
There is no doubt that these are seeds of honey locust. They have 
a terminal hylum and point of attachment, whereas the garden 
bean has a lateral hylum and point of attachment. There are 
several other features of distinction. 

The large, flat pods of the honey locust have a saccharine 
material in some quantity in between the seeds. This material 
was gathered and eaten by Indians. Honey locust pods and seeds 
have been noted in material from the Ozark bluff dwellings and 
Kentucky bluff shelters. The seeds of honey locust in the Bynum 
mound doubtless represent discarded material from food supplies. 



Cane. Charred cane occurred in five lots (3564B, 3570B, 
3575B, 3567B, 3579A), one from burial 24, and four from mound 
B, feature 8 and 10 pit, but not in large quantity in any lot. 

There are two species of cane, Arundinaria gigantea and 
Arundinaria tecta. The stems of these can be distinguished only 
by the larger size of the former. In this material the pieces are 
so broken that the diameters of the stems from which they come 
cannot be determined. 

Cane was used by Indians for making mats and baskets and 
in construction. In more recent times, at least, it has become 
a prominent material for fish poles. There is no processing evi- 
dent on the material from the site to indicate its purpose. 

Lot. No. 3577 may represent impressions of cane leaves, but 
the identification is not very certain. 

Hic\ory nuts. Hickory-nut shells occurred in seven of the 
lots (3564A, 3565, 3568, 3570A, 3576C, 3578, 3579F), four from 
burial 24 and 26 pit, three from mound B, features 8 and 10 pit, 
totaling a considerable quantity. Most of these shells were frag- 
mentary, but in some instances the nuts were almost whole. 

Hickory nuts were widely used by Indians as food and are 
quite common in Eastern archaeological sites. Various species 
were used. Without check material from the immediate area, 
we hesitate to attempt specific identification of the species from 
the site, and place them only to genus. 

In the Southeast the nuts were often prepared by cracking them 
in mortars, placing the cracked nuts in hot water to extract the 
oil, and skimming off the oil for use. The shells in lot 3565 are 
so finely and uniformly cracked that the nuts may have been pre- 
pared in this manner. 

Charcoal. Charcoal occurs in several of the lots, but usually in 
rather small pieces. In some instances it was possible to suggest 
possible identifications of the wood, but too much confidence 
should not be placed in these. 

Seeds of passion flower. The seeds of the mappop or passion 
flower in one lot (3573), feature 10 post mold, are of particular 
interest. These are almost certainly of the passion flower, and 
represent the first occurrence of evidence of this plant in an 
archaeological site of which we have heard. 

The plant grows wild throughout much of the Southeast, and 
is reported to have been eaten by the Indians. Some early ac- 
counts suggest that it may possibly have been cultivated by some 
tribes. The European clergy were interested in the plant, because 
some of the floral structures suggest the cross and crown of thorns 
of the crucifixion, hence the name "passion flower." 

The only seeds which we had for comparison were from 
cultivated fruits bought some years ago in the Ann Arbor market. 
We have confidence in the identification as the similarity was 
very close. Comparison should be made with seeds from wild 
plants. 



48 



Acorns. Shelled acorns were found in two lots (3576E, 3579C), 
both from mound B, feature 8 and 10 pit. Acorn meats have 
been frequently noted in archaeological sites in the Southeast. 
There are some early accounts of processing of acorns for food in 
that area. We suspect that they were a rather common food in 
the region, more so than commonly considered. 



REMARKS 

The frequency of wild food materials and the apparent com- 
plete absence of cultivated plants such as corn, beans, and pump- 
kins seems noteworthy. This may be due to accidents of pres- 
ervation, but account should be taken of it in considerations of 
the site. 



ANIMAL BONES 

by Dr. Henry W. Setzer (United States National Museum) 



Following is the analysis of the animal refuse bone material 
from the Bynum site which has been presented through the 
courtesy of Dr. Henry W. Setzer, Associate Curator, Division of 
Mammals, United States National Museum, Washington, D. C. 
Numerous fragments of bone sent to Dr. Setzer were too small 
or fragmentary to be identified, but the following list gives those 
which could be identified, along with their provenience. 

Mound A 

West border, 0.3 foot below sod — Bison {Bison bison), 1 tooth, 9 frag- 
ments. 

East border, 5 feet east of tomb log — 1 beaver tooth (Castor 
canadensis). 
Village Site 

Deer (Odocoileus virginianus). 

Raccoon (Procyon lotor). 

Domestic cat {Felix catus). 
Feature iy 

Deer. 
Feature 19, post mold 

Deer. 
Feature 23 

Deer. 

Bobcat (lynx rufus). 

Raccoon. 

Opossum (Didelphis virginianus). 
Feature 26 

Deer. 

Fox (Urocyon). 
Refuse Pit with Burials 24-26 

Deer. 



The animal bones recovered from the excavations at the Bynum Mounds 
do not indicate any unusual species or form which would not normally be 
expected in the area. The remains of the cat (Felix catus) found only 
0.2 foot below the sod are doubtless a recent introduction to the site well 
within historic times. 

Deer was the most common game animal, but presumably there were 
other smaller animals not represented in the remains above. Possibly, 
adverse preservative conditions eliminated small bone traces. No bird 
bones were reported, but a few fragmentary fish remains were recovered. 
Unusual is the fact that no signs of worked bone whatsoever were re- 
covered. Why some refuse bone material should be found, but no evidence 
of worked bone, is inexplicable. 

The presence of fox remains in the Bynum site raises the old question 
of red o rgray! It has long been held that only gray fox (Urocyon) would 
be found in sites dating prior to 1650. It is significant that few if any 
authenticated red fox remains have been recovered in the middle eastern 
United States from Indian sites. It is true that the red fox (Vulpes) 
occurred, natively, in the northern part of North America in pre-Columbian 
times. This fox is, though, an inhabitant of the Boreal Life Zone and thus 
would not normally be expected to occur in the Austral Zone which covers 
most of the middle eastern states. It would be well, however, from sites 
excavated in the future in this regio.i, to submit bone material suspected 
of being fox to competent authorities for determination. Because of the 
lack of diagnostic skeletal elements, it can be deduced that the fox found 
in the Bynum Site is the gray. 



49 



SHELL MATERIAL 
by Dr. J. P. E. Morrison (United States National Museum) 



The following analysis of shell material recovered from 
mounds and village features, village burials, and general explora- 
tory excavations at Bynum is supplied through the courtesy of 
Joseph P. E. Morrison, Associate Curator, Division of Mollusks, 
United States National Museum, Washington. D. C. 

Mollusks used as food: Campeloma lewisii (Walker), Viviparus contec- 
toides (W. G. Binney), Fusconaia negata (Lea), Amblema costata latecostata 
(Lea), Elliptio crassidens (Lamarck), Obovaria unicolor (Lea), Carunculina 
germana (Lea)?, Lampsilis stramineus (Conrad). 

Mollusks used for other than food purposes: Busycon contrarmm (Con- 
rad) traded from the Gulf coast, found on the pit floor of feature 8, 
Pleurocera obovata (Say) bead traded from Kentucky, Tennessee, or north- 
ern Alabama, Elliptio crassidens (Lamarck), pierced, possibly used as hoes. 

Fossil Mollusks from Upper Cretaceous rocks, probably taken from out- 
crop of fossil deposit on Houlka Creek, half a mile southwest of Bynum: 
Gryphaea (Pycnodonta) vesicularis (Lamarck), Exogyra costata (Say), 
Ostrea species. 

PROVENIENCE OF MOLLUSKS IN SITE 

Mound B 

Two fragments of Busycon contrarium (Conrad) located on pit floor of 
feature 8, mound B. These specimens establish fact of trade with Gulf 
Coast. 
Village site 

Feature 23 {refuse pit). Plow line to 0.3 foot below: Campeloma lewisii 
(Walker), 42 specimens; Viviparus contectoides (W. G. Binney), 4 speci- 



mens: Fusconaia negata (Lea), 5 specimens; Elliptio crassidens (Lamarck), 
2 specimens; Lampsilis stramineus (Conrad), 2 specimens. 

Feature 24. 0.3 foot below plow line in post mold: Exogyra costata 
(Say), 1 specimen. (Suggests possible use in digging post hole.) 

Burial 18. 0.2 foot below plow line: Amblema costata latecostata (Lea), 
1 specimen. 

Burial 23. Plow line to 0.4 foot below: Campeloma lewisii (Walker), 
106 specimens; Viviparus contectoides (W. G. Binney), 15 specimens; Fus- 
conaia negata (Lea), 1 specimen; Carunculina germana (Lea)?, 1 specimen; 
Lampsilis stramineus (Conrad), 4 specimens. 

Burial 24, Burial 26. 0.1 to 0.6 foot below plow line: Campeloma lewisii 
(Walker), 234 specimens; Viviparus contectoides (W. G. Binney), 25 speci- 
mens; Fusconaia negata (Lea), 29 specimens; Amblema costata latecostata 
(Lea), 1 specimen; Elliptio crassidens (Lamarck), 12 specimens, 3 pierced, 
perhaps for use as hoes; Obovaria unicolor (Lea), 16 specimens; Lampsilis 
stramineus (Conrad), 37 specimens; Pleurocera obovata (Say), 1 bead speci- 
men. Shell traded from Kentucky, Tennessee, or northern Alabama. 

Fire pit 

Two — plow line to 0.2 foot below: Campeloma lewisii (Walker), 8 

specimens. 
One — 0.2 foot below plow line: Fusconaia negata (Lea), 3 specimens. 
One — 0.3 foot below plow line: Ostrea species (fossil), 2 fragments. 

Unassociated, village surface to plow line. Campeloma lewisii (Walker), 
5 specimens; Fusconaia negata (Lea), 2 specimens. 

Unassociated in village deposit, 0.4 foot below plow line. Campeloma 
lewisii (Walker), 4 specimens; Viviparus contectoides (W. G. Binney), 1 
specimen; Fusconaia negata (Lea), 3 specimens. 



50 



Analytical Site Summary and 
Comparative Statement 



The Bynum site consisted of six mounds and an extensive vil- 
lage area. Of the six mounds, A, B, D, E, and F were excavated 
and A, B, and D were found in a condition to yield data. 
Mounds E and F had been almost obliterated by erosion and 
plowing. Mound C, a small intact dome-shaped structure, was 
left untouched. The village area was laid out in a grid system 
of i o-foot trenches at 40-foot intervals and systematically tested 
for occupational evidence. 

In the village area over 3,000 post molds were uncovered, most 
of which did not form easily recognizable patterns. But, from 
the large number of molds it was possible to discern seven definite 
circular patterns ranging in size from a small 14-foot circle to one 
78 feet in diameter. (See features 7, 14, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 24; 
and map on fig. 2.) Of the five circular post mold patterns 
extending in a line northwest from beneath mound A, the first, 
feature 7, was sealed off beneath mound A and produced a few 
sherds of the sand-tempered type only. Thus, this feature is one 
that existed during the times of sand-tempered pottery and prior 
to the advent of cordmarking as well as prior to the erection of 
the mound covering it. The post molds of the other four pat- 
terns (features 24, 14, 19, and 21) likewise yielded predominandy 
sand-tempered fabric-impressed pottery, though some cordmarked 
and clay-grit types appeared in the upper levels. The inference is 
that all five of these structures were roughly contemporaneous, 
at least they were probably in existence during the time only 
fabric-impressed pottery was known, and, as the old post molds 
filled in, later cordmarked and clay-grit wares were deposited 
in the upper levels of the molds. Feature 20 was a more prob- 
lematical circular post mold pattern, but the pottery associated 
with it would indicate that, while possibly built during fabric- 
impressed times, it lasted longer; for it had a higher percentage 
of cordmarked (Furrs) than it did fabric impressed. It is also of 
interest because of its association with the fragments of Marksville 
pot which were found there. Feature 22 was the small 14-foot 
circular pattern with a circular fire pit in center (fig. 2) and 
undoubtedly represents a small house unit. The pottery asso- 
ciated with it was scanty but included 42 percent Tishomingo 
Cordmarked. Because of the few sherds, it is impossible to state 
whether this structure is early or late, but probably it represents 
a later type. 

The five large circular patterns are of interest in comparing 
them to other circular patterns from better known areas. In the 
Lee County excavations, Jennings found two round or subrec- 



tangular house patterns at the mound site of MLe-62, but these 
were only 20 feet in diameter. In the Copena village site of 
Luv-65, Webb (1942), found a small, circular house pattern. 
This site, as discussed later, has other further traits in common 
with Bynum. Adena sites produce large circular post mold pat- 
terns, but these are always of two kinds — those with diameters of 
97 feet or more and those with diameters of 60 feet or less. 
None is known between these two dimensions (Webb, 1945, 
p. 53). The Bynum circular patterns, however, had the follow- 
ing diameters: Feature 7, 35 feet; feature 14, 65 feet; feature 19, 
56 feet; feature 20, too problematical to estimate; feature 21, 78 
feet; and feature 24, 58 feet. Adena post molds in both circular 
and rectangular patterns are in pairs. This characteristic was 
not observed at Bynum, though in one circular pattern (feature 
14) some of the larger post molds seemed to be paired and smaller 
post molds (three to five) interspersed between them. This ar- 
rangement was observed for a portion of the circle, but did not 
keep repeating itself in a regular manner so that it was impossible 
to say definitely whether this design was deliberate or accidental. 
Thus, the Bynum circular post mold patterns cannot be considered 
typical Adena features either by diameter, size, or arrangement 
of paired post molds. 

Closer similarities to the Bynum circular post mold patterns are 
seen in those excavated by Collins at the Deasonville site in 
Yazoo County, Miss. (Collins, 1932). One (Collins' House Ring 
No. 1, pp. 2-5) was a triple mold pattern much like Bynum 
feature No. 24. Collins' example was 60 feet in diameter; Bynum 
feature 24 was 58 feet in diameter. Two other circular patterns 
were found by Collins, House Ring No. 2 being 45 feet in 
diameter (ibid., pp. 5, 6), and House Ring No. 3 being only 
38 feet in diameter (ibid., pp. 6, 8). The smallest circular 
pattern from Bynum was the one sealed off by mound A which 
was 35 feet in diameter. 

Two major differences exist, however, between Collins' circular 
post mold patterns and those of Bynum — his showed evidences of 
entrance-ways on the western sides; those at Bynum had no dis- 
tinct entrance that is now discernible; and the posts for Collins' 
structures had been set in trenches which he was clearly able to 
define. Those at Bynum had been set directly into the ground 
without the benefit of wall trenches. 

Personal correspondence with T. M. N. Lewis discloses that 
four circular house patterns were found in the Hiwassee Island 
mound and two in the village. On page 4 in Hiwassee Island 



51 



(Lewis and Kneberg, 1946), mention is made of finding a cir- 
cular pattern on the Upper Valley component level of the De 
Armond site. This Upper Valley period is regarded as con- 
temporary with the Bynum pre -mound Saltillo Fabric ware. 
Lewis believes that the early Bynum occupation is related rather 
closely to the Upper Valley aspect and mentions finding some 
large circular patterns having diameters of around 50 feet on a 
site in Humphreys County, Tenn., on the bank of the Duck 
River. 

In the Norris Basin, the post mold patterns revealed in excava- 
tion were all predominantly rectangular of various sizes (Webb, 
1938, p. 190). Sites in the Wheeler Basin do not seem to have 
produced any comparable circular post mold patterns (Webb, 
1939). Although the Crooks site (type, Marksville site) produced 
no circular post mold patterns, an "arc of post molds suggestive 
of a circular structure" was found at the Tchefuncte site of 
Lafayette mounds (Ford and Quimby, 1945, p. 22). 

As indicated in the section on pottery, close affinities may exist 
between the Bynum ceramic complex and those of the Delta 
region when the findings of the Mississippi Valley survey are 
available. From present evidence it would appear that the closest 
similarities to structure patterns also lay in the Delta region. 
Though the pottery complex extends eastward and northward 
and included the findings of Jennings in Lee County, his post 
mold patterns are not so similar to those of Bynum (or Deason- 
ville) as the ones at Bynum are to Deasonville. 

The indication of a circular post mold pattern having been 
found at the Copena village site of Lu v 65 in northern Alabama 
mentioned above is of increased interest because of the similarity 
between that village and the Bynum village in several other traits 
as well. Webb, in speaking of Lu v 65, says, 

One of the outstanding features of the site was the large number of 
midden pits which had been dug into the sub-soil, and which were easily 
detected by difference in color and texture of earth (Webb, 1942, p. 173). 

At Bynum there were numerous pits located in just this manner 
(see section on excavations for details) some of which contained 
refuse, both sherd and animal bones, others of which merely had 
ash and charcoal. 

The circular post mold pattern from Lu v 65 has already been 
mentioned, but Webb says about it: 

The pattern of the molds evidently indicates a circular structure, but 
the outline is somewhat ragged due in part to the fact that a part of the 
circular pattern is missing. . . . There appeared no definite prepared 
floor for this structure which lay in the center of a midden area (Webb, 
1942, p. 174). 

No prepared floors were observed for any of the circular structures 
at Bynum. 

Site Lu v 65 produced 75 percent of all the sand-tempered cord- 
marked pottery from the Pickwick Basin and 87 percent of all 
the textile-impressed sand-tempered pottery. In addition, there 
was a large amount of limestone-tempered ware (over 2,000 
sherds) and a small amount (48 sherds) of clay-grit. Bynum, of 
course, produced only a small amount of limestone-tempered pot- 
tery, but the interesting factor here is that the site Lu v 65 should 
produce the majority of cord and textile-impressed sand-tempered 



wares from the entire Pickwick Basin. Bynum was a predom- 
inantly cord and textile-impressed sand-tempered site. 

Not all the traits postulated for Lu v 65 (Webb, 1942, p. 175), 
were noted at Bynum but certain of those which were may be 
quite diagnostic. Of the flint projectile points found at Lu v 65, 
95 were of the characteristic Copena type. One from the Bynum 
village area is of this variety (pi. 10, fig. 19), With these char- 
acteristic points at Lu v 65 was associated another smaller triangu- 
lar point labeled type No. 2 by Webb and illustrated in Webb's 
lower row, plate 207, figure 1. Several points of this type were 
also recovered from the village area at Bynum (compare pi. 10, 
figs. 21 and 25, with those of Webb). 

This Copena village site of northern Alabama, Lu v 65, was lo- 
cated about 600 yards east of two earth mounds of the copper- 
galena complex, sites Lu°63 and Lu°64. While Bynum mound 
and Copena mound complexes are discussed below, it is impor- 
tant to note in connection with this discussion of village areas that 
in both cases mounds were located nearby. From one of these 
mounds, Lu°63, came a lead-filled copper spool similar to one 
recovered in Mound B at Bynum. (See section on copper 
spools.) 

At Bynum, differences in elevation between old village surfaces 
beneath the mounds and present surfaces indicate erosion of 
from two to three feet of topsoil over the entire village area. 
This factor explains the occurrence of most burials immediately 
below the plow zone or in areas where they were partially de- 
stroyed by plowing. If we are to assume an occupation of consid- 
erable duration after the abandonment of the circular post mold 
structures by people who made grit-tempered and cordmarked pot- 
tery, it would seem probable that occupational detritus accumu- 
lated to some depth above the circular post mold pattern. This ac- 
cumulation might well have preserved until the nineteenth century 
much structural evidence, such as post molds, pits, and burials. 
Subsequent erosion due to row cropping in the last 100 years 
would account for obliteration of most superficial features and 
for the deposition of a residue of late occupation material in the 
plow zone. 

The nature of the structures represented by the series of circu- 
lar post mold patterns can only be estimated by inference. An 
early use of the winter house as exemplified later among the 
Chickasaw and other Muskoghean peoples suggest the most likely 
use for these structures. Although many molds were observed 
inside the circles, and although in each pattern at least one mold 
seemed to occupy the approximate center of the circle, supports 
are not definitely indicated. Among the large circular Adena 
patterns which were over 97 feet in diameter, Webb suggested 
that they were not covered by a single roof, but rather that 

Scattered post molds in the interior of some of these large circles suggest 
that "rooms" built against the inside walls of the circle may have had roofs. 
This would have left a central area without any roof (Webb and Snow, 
1945. P- 53)- 

The smaller Adena structures (diameter 60 feet or less) seem to 
have been covered by a single roof. Webb says, 

No roof has ever been found, but its existence is predicated upon the 
discovery of interior post molds arranged in a regular pattern which might 
indicate roof supports (ibid.). 



52 



It is possible that some such similar arrangement existed in both 
the larger and smaller circular structures at Bynum. 

Gridding of the site by test trenches made it impossible that 
any large structural pattern could have been missed in the main 
area of village occupation. The multiplicity of apparently un- 
related post molds uncovered by trench and area excavations can 
be at least partly explained by the fact that all historic southeastern 
villages had a diversity of scaffoldings, racks for drying game, and 
single poles for trophies and ceremonies. Light temporary sum- 
mer shelters would also leave post molds with indefinite pat- 
terns. Occupation of the site over any reasonable period of time 
could leave large numbers of such unassociated post molds. 

Of the five excavated mounds at Bynum, only three produced 
really usable data. Two mounds, E and F, had been eroded and 
cultivated until almost obliterated. Mound F had further been 
cut by the county road so that only a small portion of the original 
mound still remained. Mound C was left unexcavated and can- 
not be used in the following discussion. 

Mound D, which was shown to be the earliest on a ceramic 
basis, was erected over a large subpit which gave evidence of 
having contained a hot fire or fires over a long period of time. 
Corner post molds revealed that at one time the pit had been 
covered by a canopy roof structure if not enclosed entirely by 
walls and roof. Small branch molds on the western side of the 
pit indicated the latter possibility, but they were not found on 
the other sides. Possibly a flat roof with lean-to type wall on one 
side was used. No bones or calcined bones other than a few frag- 
ments of human tooth caps were recovered in the pit. This sub- 
pit was a natural catchall for subsurface water. During excava- 
tion, it was noted that the ash and charcoal in the pit was 
extremely moist, especially in the lower levels. It is possible that 
all evidence of bones other than the tooth cap fragments have 
long since disappeared. Or it is possible that these tooth caps 
indicate that there had been a body or bodies cremated in the 
pit, but that the bones were removed for burial elsewhere. 

The lead-filled copper spool and small crudely rolled bead in 
the subpit may be actual mortuary offerings or they may be acci- 
dental in that after the removal of the burned bones and other 
material from the pit, these two items, partially destroyed, were 
overlooked and left behind. One greenstone celt was found near 
the rim of the crematory pit, and, although it might also be an 
intentional offering, it could also have been overlooked in the 
process of erecting the mound over the pit. 

Mound D was somewhat similar to Mound B in that both had 
been erected over pits which showed signs of cremations, and, if 
the artifacts found in D are counted as actual mortuary offerings, 
then both mounds had grave goods. Mound B likewise had 
evidence of a structure having been placed over the pit. Small 
branch molds were found completely around the rim of the pit 
in mound B, whereas in mound D they were found on one side 
only. The evidence seemed to show that in mound B after the 
fires had cooled and the structure collapsed, the mortuary offer- 
ings, cremations, and flesh burials were placed on the ashes in 
the pit floor. No evidence of a structural collapse was noted 
in mound D. 



In mound A there was no evidence for presuming that orig- 
inally there had been a covering structure over the burials. The 
major part of the mound floor, however, had been burned and 
contained ash, and in this respect it was similar to mound B. 
The inclusion of two flanking logs on either side of the principal 
burial perhaps substituted for the walls or rim of a pit. Burials 
in mound A were flesh burials, of dry bones. In mound B, 
however, all were cremations, the flexed ones representing in 
situ cremations, except for one definite flesh burial, and one 
assumed flesh burial with the copper spools. In mound D there 
may have been no burials at all, though the pit had evidently been 
used as a crematory pit. The burials were either made elsewhere, 
or the bone traces subsequently rotted away. 

On ceramic evidence, mound D is seen to be the earliest. There 
is a slight indication that mound A might be earlier than B on 
the basis of sherd percentages. The one copper spool in mound 
D was completely lead filled. One spool in mound B was simi- 
larly lead filled; one was partially lead filled; and 2 had no lead 
filling at all. In mound A, none of the 4 spools were lead filled. 
In mound D, 1 small greenstone celt was found; in mound B, 
there were 20 stone celts of varying size and three clusters of large 
projectile points. In mound A there were neither celts nor 
projectile points. None of the three mounds had pottery as a 
mortuary offering, though there were scattered sherds on the 
mound floors, under various molds, and throughout the fills of all 
three mounds. Although nothing can be stated definitely beyond 
the fact that mound D is the eariiest, it seems likely that there 
may be a progression from mound D to that of A, followed almost 
immediately by B. Or it could be assumed that one group of 
Indians, practicing cremation, built and used the pit of mound D. 
Sometime subsequently another group with a knowledge of clay- 
grit temper and cordmarking pottery, practicing flesh burials and 
in situ cremations, built mound A. A subsequent amalgamation 
of these two groups produced mound B, in which they joined the 
burial ceremonials but instituted dry bone on the one hand and 
flesh burial on the other. The flesh burials plus in situ crema- 
tion and the copper spools without lead filling would be attribut- 
able to the group from A. The dry bone cremations and the 
celts and the lead-filled spools would have belonged to the group 
from D. The idea of erecting a covered structure over the burial 
and crematory pit would be derived from the smaller one of D. 
This latter hypothesis, of two slightly -different groups joining to- 
gether to build one large, bigger-than-ever burial mound is a tempt- 
ing one to propose, especially in view of Dr. Newman's analysis of 
the skeletal material. Dr. Newman found that the one restorable 
burial from mound A was a definite Centralid type — seemingly the 
earliest occurrence of this type so far south. The other burials in 
the village area from this same horizon were of the Sylvid type. 
The paucity of good skeletal material from the Bynum site again 
makes it impossible to state categorically that a new physical 
type, with some differing cultural traits, arrived alter the Bynum 
area was first inhabited and subsequently amalgamated with the 
original settlers, but the slight evidence offered would tend in 
that direction. Further weight is lent to this hypothesis by a 
personal communication from T. M. N. Lewis in 1949 who found 



53 



that the evidence from West Tennessee investigations indicated 
that the people who made early fabric-marked, sand-tempered 
pottery were a different group from the people who made clay 
grit, cordmarked pottery. 

Village burials were mainly flesh, flexed ones, though two ex- 
amples of cremations (burials 28 and 29) were found not far 
from Mound B, showing that cremation was not a trait reserved 
solely for persons of significant rank alone. Descriptions of 
these burials have already been given in the section on excavations 
and Dr. Marshall T. Newman describes the physical anthropol- 
ogy. From burials in the village area, grave goods were com- 
pletely absent (except for the historic burials), unless one counts 
numerous fresh-water mollusk shells which may have been acci- 
dental inclusions. Only one of the shells showed the slightest 
sign of having been worked or used for any other purpose than 
the extraction of food. 

The pottery analysis, based on the work of Jennings in Lee 
County, Webb in the Pickwick Basin, and Ford and others in 
Louisiana, showed a close relationship to the material in Lee 
County, a similarity in chronology of tempers with Pickwick 
Basin, and slight trade influences with the Marksville period to 
the southwest. The mounds at Bynum sealed off an earlier 
village layer that was pure sand-tempered plain or fabric-im- 
pressed pottery. Mounds B and A showed evidences of slight 
amounts of both sand-tempered and clay-grit cordmarked wares, 
but mound D was entirely pure sand-tempered plain or fabric-im- 
pressed. Jennings, in his Lee County excavations (Jennings, 
1941), had been able to distinguish stratigraphically between the 
cordmarked clay-grit type Tishomingo Cordmarked and the cord- 
marked sand-tempered type Furrs Cordmarked. Because of the 
sealing off of sand-tempered fabric pottery by the mounds at 
Bynum and its pure occurrence in mound D, it was possible to 
distinguish stratigraphically between the fabric-impressed wares 
and the cordmarked wares. Thus, there is demonstrated a 
chronological sequence of pottery types which runs from the earli- 
est sand-tempered Baldwin Plain and Saltillo Fabric Impressed, 
through sand-tempered Furrs Cordmarked into later clay-grit 
tempered Tishomingo Plain and Tishomingo Cordmarked. In 
other areas of the Southeast both fabric-impressed and cord- 
marked pottery seem to be early. It appears in many of the 
pottery complexes subsequent to fiber tempering and just prior to 
or coeval with check stamping. (See Griffin, 1946, pp. 46-59, for 
an excellent discussion of these early manifestations in the South- 
east.) The sequential development of tempering types as devel- 
oped for the Bynum site, the Lee County area, and the Pickwick 
Basin does not always hold true in other areas as well. The gen- 
eral priority, though, of both fabric-impressed and cordmarked 
types of pottery seems to be valid. 

Half a Marksville Stamped vessel and a few other scattered 
sherds of Marksville types showed that there were trade influences 
between that lower valley center and Bynum. Similarly, scat- 
tered sherds of the Alexander series show influences from the 
northern Alabama area. Sherds gathered from survey sites in 
Lee, Chickasaw, Itawamba, Pontotoc, and Prentiss Counties of 
northeastern Mississippi show that the occurrence of Alexander 



type sherds at Bynum was no odd chance but a part of a much 
wider spread pottery complex. 

Ceramic similarities were closest between Bynum and the sites 
of prehistoric occupation excavated by Jennings in Lee County 
(Jennings, 1941). Indications as pointed out by Griffin are that 
a sand-tempered fabric-impressed and clay-grit tempered cord- 
marked complex may have extended from the Delta region of 
Mississippi northeastward into the Lee County area (Griffin, 1945, 
pp. 229, 230). This generalized spread would include the area 
in which Bynum is located. 

On the basis of ceramics alone, then, the Bynum site is placed 
as being well within the range of Jennings' Miller culture. No 
fiber-tempered pottery having been found at Bynum (though it 
appears in nearby sites, cf. MCs-4), the Bynum site is not quite 
so early as the beginning of Miller I, but starts soon after and 
represents an occupation of the site through Miller II and into 
the beginning of Miller III. A later reoccupation of the site 
is represented by the historic Chickasaw burials found in the 
village area. The early phases of Bynum are roughly con- 
temporaneous with the later phases of the Alexander period of 
the Pickwick Basin, which in turn can be related to Tchefuncte 
in the Lower Valley (Ford and Quimby, 1945). The middle 
phases of Bynum can be related to Jennings' Miller II in Lee 
County and to Marksville in the Lower Valley. (See chart I.) 

The original source for the sand-tempered fabric-impressed 
pottery influences is most probably outside the Chickasaw and Lee 
County areas. Jennings noted that his material was very similar 
to that from the Guntersville Basin and that this, in turn, was 
similar to pottery of Mobile Bay region. Since Bynum, like the 
Lee County sites, is located on the headwaters of the Tombigbee 
drainage, the possibilities of influences having spread up the 
Tombigbee must not be overlooked. Jennings says: 

Thus, through Moore's work on the Tombigbee, a strong cordmarked com- 
plex, associated with check stamp (both presumably sand-tempered) is ob- 
served to extend from Mobile Bay to the lower end of the Lee County 
area. The association of sand with cord and textile marking observed in 
the Lee and Adams area, coupled with Dunlevy's evidence of close affilia- 
tions between Guntersville and Mobile Bay, gives an excellent suggestion 
as to the origin of sand-tempered cordmarked material found throughout 
Mississippi (Jennings, 1941, p. 217). 

While the Bynum site produced a wealth of certain material 
such as sherds, celts, and large projectile points, other traits 
highly characteristic of the Southeast were completely lacking or 
were found in such small quantities as to seem peculiar. One of 
these outstanding anomalies was the complete lack of pipes or 
other indications that the Bynum Indians knew or practiced 
smoking. Pipes are early in the Southeast, being prominent in 
Tchefuncte (Ford and Quimby, 1945) and being noted for 
Archaic sites in western Tennessee (Lewis and Kneberg, 1947). 
Jennings found a badly deteriorated limestone platform pipe at 
the mound site of MLe-62 in Lee County (Jennings, 1941, p. 203). 
This was the only example he found from the prehistoric level. 
So far no pipes or fragments of pipes have been found at over 
42 sites surveyed by surface collections from Lee and Chickasaw 
Counties. It is possible that in this immediate area of north- 
eastern Mississippi there existed Indians who did not practice 



54 



smoking, or who, if they did, practiced it by means of wooden 
pipes or reed "cigarettes," all traces of which have long since 
vanished. 

The complete absence of bone tools is even harder to explain 
than the absence of pipes. Refuse bones and burial bones were 
preserved in a poor and deteriorated condition, and it seems 
strange that some trace of bone tools was not likewise found. 
Examples of worked shell, either as ornaments or tools, were 
almost lacking at Bynum, except for the possible use as hoes 
of three perforated shells and the one bead found with burials 
24-26. Numerous broken shell fragments were found, however, 
showing that the Indians used fresh-water mollusks at least as 
food. 

Stone tools, while found, were (with the exception of the cere- 
monial greenstone celts) not very profuse. Certainly the amount 
of knives, scrapers, etc., recovered during the ten months' excava- 
tions were so few as to indicate that not much reliance was placed 
upon game animals for subsistence. Gathering, some hunting, 
and possibly some agriculture represented the main subsistence 
activities of the prehistoric Bynum Indians. 

Metallurgy, to the extent of a knowledge of complicated copper 
spools filled with lead, was known to the Bynum Indians, yet 
other artifacts of copper, common in other areas, were lacking. 
No traces of copper celts, reels, or bracelets were found, and 
only one crude bead was noted from mound D. While a few 
lumps of galena were recovered in the excavations, there was 
nothing like the profusion observed in some Copena sites. It 
can only be presumed that lacking other copper artifacts the 
Bynum Indians did not manufacture anything in the way of 
metal tools or ornaments, but that the copper spools had been 
traded in from some other area. 

It is interesting to compare the totality of the Bynum site with 
sites from other nearby regions. Both Bynum and Jennings' Lee 
County prehistoric material show mounds of conical shape, 
mound floors, subfloor pits, burials on mound floors, lack of burial 
furniture directly in association with the burials on mound floor 
(except for the copper spools with burial 1, mound A), both flexed 
and extended burials. Jennings' burials in the mounds did not 
have cremations with them as were found at Bynum; on the 
other hand, the Bynum mounds did not display random inclusive 
burials as did the MLe-62 mounds. Both the Lee County area 
and the Bynum site have a close similarity in ceramics. In fact, 
except for the Bynum type Houlka Gray and a few minority 
wares, the same type pottery is found in both places. Each is 
characterized by a plain and/or fabric, impressed ware, a sand- 
tempered cordmarked ware, and a clay-grit plain and/or cord- 
marked ware. 

Lacking in Jennings' excavations were the large circular post 
mold patterns of the village area at Bynum, the large projectile 
points, the numerous celts and copper spools as mortuary offer- 
ings. Jennings did find "two squared pieces of copper which 
appear to have originally jacketed two wooden disc earplugs" 
(Jennings, 1941, p. 203) in the fill of a previously dug hole in 
mound B at MLe-62. This is not the same type of spool that was 
characteristic of Bynum. In his historic sites Jennings found 



many stone celts, including one "unpolished celt of greenstone" 
(Jennings, 1941, p. 183), but none evidently from the prehistoric 
sites. 

With Copena there is about one-third agreement in the trait 
list as given by Webb ( 1942, pp. 304, 305), including the following 
traits as he lists them: Circular post mold pattern; site in vicinity 
of large river; galena scattered throughout site; scattered post 
molds; conical earth mounds; mounds occurring in groups; burial 
in fire basin; subsoil burial pits; extended burials; flexed burials; 
evidence of fire in burial pits; post mold associated with burial 
pits; cremations; mica as burial furniture (dubious at Bynum); 
flint scrapers; flint knives; drills; triangular points; small green- 
stone celts (one at Bynum); Copena points (one at Bynum); 
large greenstone celts; beads, cyclindrical rolled sheets (one at 
Bynum); spool-shaped ear ornaments (at Bynum these ornaments 
of copper were not associated with the ears); round-bottomed ves- 
sels; folded rims or added rim strips; sand-tempered pottery; 
crushed limestone-tempered sherds (a very small percent at By- 
num). Not all the above traits obviously occurred at Bynum with 
the frequency that they do in Copena sites as a whole. The 
Copena trait list as prepared by Webb is composed of character- 
istics from eight sites. Bynum is only one site with attached 
village. 

The Bynum site likewise seems to share some traits with Adena 
though these are not as numerous or pronounced as with Copena. 
A comparison with Webb's trait list for Adena shows the follow- 
ing traits in common (Webb's trait list numbers are shown in 
parentheses): 

Mounds conical (7). 

Mounds one of a group (8). 

Mounds built on their own villages (11). 

Primary mound contains midden (14). 

Later mound sections built of sterile clays (15) (mound A at Bynum 

alone showed this trait). 
Village midden in situ under mound (17). 
Mound shows individual earth loads (18). 
Impressions of grass, twigs, and leaves (19). 
Fired area at mound base (20). 
Primary purpose of mounds to cover burials (22). 
Single log rectangle about body (26) (mound A at Bynum alone showed 

this trait). 
Pit tomb dug below earth surface (37). 
Earth or stone embankment about subfloor tomb (38). 
Mound erected over subfloor tomb (40). 
Multiple occupancy of house sites (50) (possible in the large circular 

patterns of the village area at B\nnm, but not known whether this 

was definitely done or not). 
Fire basin in village circular (54). 
Fire basins had potsherds in ashes (58). 

Cremations, remain redeposited separately in mound (66). 
Cremations redeposited separately in village (67) (two cases only at 

Bynum) 
Unburned artifacts placed with redeposited cremations (74) (only 

mound B at Bynum). 
Body extended, in flesh on back, no tomb (77). 
Important central graves (82). 
Skeletons flexed (94). 

Stemmed projectile points deposited in cache (103). 
Celts, granite, and other igneous rock (123). 
Beads, rolled sheet of Copper (181). 



55 



Common pottery traits include the following: 

Woodland Cordmarked (202). 

Pottery vessels not used as mortuary offerings (205). 

The Bynum relationships with the Tchefuncte-Marksville area 
are fewer than they are with other areas. One Tchefuncte site, 
the Lafayette mounds, produced a suggested circular post mold 
pattern. One copper spool at the Crooks site was similar to those 
at Bynum. The fragments of a portion of a Marksville pot and 
a few other sherds of Marksville type are the closest tie-up between 
the Bynum site and the Tchefuncte-Marksville area. 

It would seem then that the closest similarities with Bynum lay 
in sites to the northeast in the Lee County area and in northern 
Alabama (Copena sites) and a possibility of tie-ins with material 
from the Delta region, especially the Yazoo River area. 

The Bynum site appears to have been one which was occupied 
early in southeastern prehistory by a group of Woodland or 
Woodland derived Indians who knew the use of sand-tempered 
pottery. Sometime after their initial settlement of the site, the 
practice of building burial mounds was inaugurated. The initial 



pit tomb had a canopy type covering and possibly side walls 
and covered crematory pits as well as cremations. Subsequent 
to the introduction of the burial mound idea, cordmarked, 
pottery, first with sand temper and later with clay-grit temper, 
was introduced. At the same time, as examplified by mound A, 
either the burial customs changed to all flesh burials or possibly 
a new but unrelated group introduced these innovations. Grave 
goods were usually scanty and never included pottery. As no 
evidence exists of temple mounds or of secondary burials in the 
burial mounds, it can be assumed that the Bynum site was not 
occupied continuously up into historic times. Both the ceramic 
and nonceramic material seems to indicate that there was a 
hiatus in the occupation of the site between the time of the 
people who built the mounds and the reoccupation of the site 
by a late historic group of Chickasaw Indians. These latter 
Indians made the graves containing the trade goods material and 
probably no longer practiced the art of pottery making, but relied 
on European manufactured goods in that respect. 



56 



Conclusions 



The objective of this excavation was achieved by salvaging 
data and artifacts at a site through which the Natchez Trace 
Parkway will be constructed, and by utilizing this material to 
interpret the features of the site and the traits of its inhabitants 
for research and the general public. 

The framework within which the prehistoric period of the 
Bynum site fits is a general southern Hopewellian manifestation 
with many Woodland determinants present. These manifesta- 
tions come within the general horizon of what has been termed 
Burial Mound I in this region. Trait affiliations are in evidence 
to link Marksville in Louisiana, and Deasonville-Miller II in 
Mississippi with Copena in northern Alabama. All have trait 
affinities with the southern Hopewellian manifestations at Mc- 
Quorquodale in southern Alabama and the Hamilton focus of 
the Middle Valley Aspect of the Hopewellian phase in Tennessee. 
Many key determinants within the broad Woodland pattern are 
to be recognized among the foci here represented. A survey 
of Bynum traits places the burial mounds and prehistoric village 
alike in definite relationship to complexes within this framework. 

The problem is to determine the position of prehistoric Bynum 
in relation to these foci, granted that definite relationship exists, 
and so establish cultural and temporal horizons. In the absence 
of vertical stratigraphy except by limited inference, the site has 
been divided into an historic phase, that of the Chickasaw occu- 
pation 1810-35, an d a prehistoric phase of unknown absolute 
duration in which it is possible to differentiate the burial mounds 
with their associated post mold circles from the residue of the 
village site, including flexed oval-pit burials, most refuse pits, 
and miscellaneous superficial post molds without discernible 
patterns. 

Evidence may be set up on the basis of the accompanying trait 
comparisons to support relationship of the Bynum mound and 
prehistoric village manifestations to Hopewellian foci in the 
Southeast. Here it may be observed that a significantly large 
proportion of Bynum mound traits is found in the Copena and 
Miller foci, with Copena in the lead showing 85.7 percent. 
Miller, 78.6 percent, is closely followed by the Hamilton focus, 
71.4 percent, and Marksville, 67.8 percent. McQuorquodale, 
while including many important traits, is last with 57.1 percent. 

Traits associated with the village site at Bynum are totaled 
separately because it is possible that the builders of the mounds 
were followed by later prehistoric non-mound-building peoples 
and ultimately by historic Chickasaw. The historic Chickasaw 
traits are not included. An obvious disadvantage is incurred 
in the village trait comparisons due to the fact that the loci com- 
pared are identified primarily with mound investigation. II more 
were known of Miller, Copena (aside from Lu'65), Marksville, 
"Southern Alabama Hopewell" and Middle Tennessee Valley 



village sites, a more representative list could be offered. The 
foci with most traits identified at the Bynum village are Miller II 
with 71.8 percent, followed by Copena with 56.4 percent. Marks- 
ville, McQuorquodale, and Hamilton, each of which lacks specific 
village trait associations, all drop below 50 percent and are least 
comparable. 

In all of these foci, key traits may be observed: conical burial 
mounds with subfloor pits, except possibly for Marksville; burial 
offerings, which are rarely abundant and frequently absent, 
typically nonpottery with stone and some copper artifacts; flaked 
artifacts made from cores or heavy flakes (primary chipping 
predominant over secondary); points characteristically stemmed 
and corner-notched; and pottery with impressed designs on simple 
forms. 

In placing Bynum temporally it should be noted that foci with 
which it is compared are not entirely coeval with this site or with 
each other. Thus, 

Copena has connection with the later Middle Mississippi complex, for it 
includes globular vessels with an incised decoration on the rim, strap han- 
dles, the specialized Copena point and small triangular points (Griffin, 1946, 

p. 72). 

At Bynum none of these Copena traits are associated with 
mounds A, B, and D and the early period of the site. The dom- 
inance of sand-tempered fabric-marked pottery, cremations 
(mounds B and possibly D), and the apparent absence of corn, 
all point to pre-Copena elements at Bynum. It is reasonable to 
present the first occupation at Bynum as possibly contemporary 
with late Archaic in Louisiana, northern Mississippi, and Ala- 
bama, and prior to the fully developed Copena. Subsequent oc- 
cupation featuring clay-grit cordmarked pottery, extraneous 
wares, and oval pit graves may extend the temporal span upward. 
Connections with Woodland and Hopewell are apparent in many 
Bynum mound traits. Since no dendrochronological material or 
definitely dated trait or object was obtained at Bynum, it is im- 
possible to speak in terms of dates, except for the final historic 
Chickasaw occupation of 1810-35. 

The Bynum site can thus be regarded as a component with 
close affiliation with Miller II, Copena, and Marksville foci, and 
definite affinity with McQuorquodale of southern Alabama and 
Hamilton focus of middle Tennessee aspect, within the Hope- 
wellian phase and ultimately within a general Woodland pattern. 
In further support of these relationships, as demonstrated by traits. 
an active trade — shown by the presence of Busycon from the 
Cull ("oast, copper from the (Jre.it Lakes region, greenstone Irom 
the Alabama-Tennessee piedmont, Hint from northern Alabama. 
Tennessee, and possibly Ohio, and galena Irom Missouri — indi- 
cates the employment in prehistory ol the north south trail system 
which became the Natchez Trace. 



57 



Tables 



Table I. — Comp 


arative 


trait list, Bynum site 




Bynum traits (prehistoric) 


Miller 


Copena 


Marks- 
ville 


McQuor- 
quodale 


Ten- 
nessee 
Hamil- 
ton 

focus 


FOOD GETTING 

Agriculture inferred but un- 
substantiated : 
Corn (inference) MV 


Inf. 


Inf. (?) 


(No) 


Inf. 


X 


lunting and gathering: 

Hickory nuts MV 

Deer V 












X 


X 


X 




X 


Bison V 












Terrapin V 

Beaver V 

Mollusks, fresh water. .V 

COMMUNITY PLAN 

/illage location: 
On low bluffs bounding 




X 


X 


X 


X 
X 






X 

X 




X 


X 

X 

X 
X 
X 
X 






Lying between mounds 






Ullage structures: 

Circular or ovoid 

Posts set in holes 

No entry observed 

Shallow fire basins 


X 
X 


(?) 
(?) 














X 
X 
X 

X 
X 








(?) 

X 






Burial mound groups 

Ullage complex: 


X 

X 
X 


X 


X 


Burials in oval pits 














Burials with shells of food 












Burials tightly flexed 

lounds: 

Domed or conical 

Burial mounds only 

Continuous construction. . 


X 

X 

X 
X 


X 

X 
X 








X 


X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 


X 
X 
X 




X 


(?) 


Humus largely cleaned 

from mound floor 

Subfloor burials 


X 
X 




X 


X 
X 
X 


X 
X 

(?) 


X 


Burial on floor framed by 


X 


Post-supported structure 







Table I. — Comparative trait list, Bynum site 


— Continued 












Ten- 


Bynum traits (prehistoric) 


Miller 


Copena 


Marks- 
ville 


McQuor- 
quodale 


nessee 
Hamil- 
ton 
focus 


COMMUNITY PLAN COn. 












Mounds — Continued 












Mound built over burned 












structure or widespread 












fire 


X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 


X 


Fire in burial pits 




Log impressions on central 










X 








CEREMONIAL ACTIVITY 










Mound complex: 












Burials lightlv flexed 


X 


X 


X 




X 


Burials extended 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Burials with nonceramic 












offerings 




X 


X 


X 


X 


Burials with copper spools 


X 


X 


X 


X 




Burials with greenstone 












celts 




X 


X 


X 








X 


Burials with flaked points 




X 


X 


X 


X 


Redeposition of cremated 














X 


X 






X 


INDUSTRIAL AND ARTISTIC 








ACTIVITY 












Flaked stone: 


















X 




X 


Stemmed points V 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Side scrapers V 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


End scrapers V 

Drills V 






X 
X 




X 


X 


X 


X 


Knives V 


X 


y 


X 




X 


Ground stone: 












Greenstone celts M 




X 


X 


X 


x(?) 


Metates V 


X 


X 


X 




X 


Manos V 


x(?) 


x(?) 


X 




X 


Pitted stones V 


X 


X 


X 




X 


Hematite as pigment. . . V 
Shell (utilized): 










X 












Busycon with burial. . M 

Shell hoe V 

Metal complexes: 










X 






















Rolled copper bead . . M 


X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X 




Galena, ground or 














X 


X 


X 


X 





soii.n o— 5i- 



59 



Table I. — Comparative trait 


list, By 


num site — Continued 


Bynum traits (prehistoric) 


Miller 


Copena 


Marks- 
ville 


McQuor- 
quodale 


Ten- 
nessee 
Hamil- 
ton 
focus 


INDUSTRIAL AND ARTISTIC 

activity — continued 

Galena, powdered M 

Fiber complex : Twined 
cord M 












x 
x 

X 

X 
X 


X 


X 






Pottery complex: 
Local types: 
Baldwin Plain. . . . MV 






Saltillo Fabric Im- 
pressed MV 

Furrs Cordmarked MV 


















Tishomingo Cord- 
marked . MV 










Tishomingo Plain . . MV 

Houlka Gray MV 

Minority types: 

Single Cord Im- 
pressed M V 

Limestone Tem- 
pered MV 

Marksville Stamped . . V 




























X 
X 












X 
X 










Alexander Incised . V 


X 

X 
X 
X 








General categories: 
Cordmarked. MV 


X 
X 
X 






X 


Fabric-Marked.. ..MV 






X 


Plain MV 


X 


X 


X 


Duplications omitted: 

28 Bynum mound traits . . . 
39 Bynum village traits. . . 


22 

28 


24 
22 


19 
18 


16 
7 


20 
18 



Note. — Unless specifically noted, M = mound and V = village. 

Table 2. — Frequency and occurrence of right angle everted 
rims, Baldwin Plain 

Provenience Number 

Mound A: 

i foot above floor in fill I 

0.3 foot above mound floor in fill I 

Below burial I 

Total 3 

Mound B: 

0.5 foot above mound floor in fill l 

2 feet from surface in fill I 

1 1 .4 feet from surface in fill I 

Under log mold I 

Feature 8: 

Prepared floor I 

0.5 foot below rim molds 1 

0.6 foot below floor 2 

Feature 10, at end log molds inside rim 1 

Total 9 

60 



Table 2. — Frequency and occurrence of right angle everted 
rims, Baldwin Plain — Continued 

Provenience Number 

Mound D m 

Village site 2 o 

Feature 14 5 

Feature 17 '. j 

Feature 19 !0 

Post mold j 

Feature 21 j 

Feature 23 2 

Feature 24 2 

Burial 18 1 

Total 43 

.. Grand total 62 

Table 3. — Frequency and occurrence of narrow-mouthed 
bowls, Baldwin Plain 

Provenience Number 

Mound A: 

0.4 foot in sod 3 

At foot of burial 1 

Total 4 

Mound B 3 

0.2 foot in sod 1 

0.5 foot from surface 1 

0.7 foot from top at center 3 

First rim molds 1 

0.2 foot under log molds 1 

0.4 foot above undisturbed red clay 3 

Feature 8: 

0.1 foot below floor in prepared clay 1 

Pit bottom in fill 1 

Feature 10: 

In pit fill 1 

At bottom of fire pit 1 

Feature 33 1 

0.5 foot below bottom of plow line 1 

Total 19 

Mound D 1 

Village site: 

Surface to plow line 3 

From surface of post molds 1 

0.4 to 1.5 feet below surface 2 

0.4 foot in plow line 2 

Bottom of plow line to 0.5 foot below 1 

Plow line to 1 foot 1 

Post molds, plow line to 1 foot I 

Post molds, 1 to 2 feet I 

West border of site 2 

On surface 1 

0.4 foot in plow zone 1 

Fire pit, N. 1950/E. 1500, level I, 0.1 to 0.5 foot below 

plow line 1 

Fire pit, N. 2020/E. 1320, 0.1 to 0.3 foot below plow line I 

Feature 17 (below plow line) 2 



Table 3. — Frequency and occurrence of narrow -mouthed 
bowls, Baldwin Plain — Continued 

Provenience Number 

Village site — Continued 
Feature 19: 

Plow line to 1 foot 5 

0.6 to 1 foot 1 

Feature 23, Plow line to 0.1 foot below 1 

Feature 28, 1 foot below plow line in pit 2 

Feature 30, bottom of plow line to 0.5 foot below 1 

Total 30 

Grand total 54 

Table 4. — Frequency and occurrence of straight-sided bowls, 
Baldwin Plain 

Provenience Number 

Mound A 2 

Mound B 7 

Feature 8, under log molds I 

Total : 8 

Mound D 2 

Feature 32 I 

Total 3 

Village site 9 

West border of site 4 

1 foot test at N. 2200/E. 1200 I 

Fire pit, N1950/E1500 I 

Feature 16 I 

Feature 19 5 

Feature 21 I 

Burial 26 1 

Total 23 

Grand total 36 

Table 5. — Frequency and occurrence of flaring rim bowls, 
Baldwin Plain 

Provenience Number 

Mound A i 

Mound B 17 

Mound B, 0.3 foot in sod I 

Feature 8 1 

Total 19 

Mound D 7 

Feature 36 1 

Total 8 

Village site 28 

Test trench 1 

West border of site 8 

Fire pit, N. 2040/E. 1 490 1 

Fire pit, N. 2150/E. 1300 2 

Feature 16 1 



Table 5. — Frequency and occurrence of flaring rim bowls, 
Baldwin Plain — Continued 

Provenience Number 
Village site — Continued 

Feature 17 3 

Feature 19 13 

Feature 21 2 

Feature 23 4 

Feature 24 3 

Feature 29 1 

Burial 24 1 

Total 68 

Grand total 96 

Table 6. — Frequency and occurrence of miscellaneous rims, 
Baldwin Plain 

Provenience Number 

Village site 5 

Feature 19 1 

Burial 18 1 

Burial 27 1 

Total 8 

Table 7. — Frequency and occurrence of punctated rims, 
Baldwin Plain 

Provenience Number 

Village site 6 

West border of site 2 

Post molds 1 

Feature 17 4 

Fire pit 1 

Feature 19 9 

Feature 24 2 

Total 25 

Table 8. — Frequency and occurrence of flaring rims, 
Saltillo Fabric Impressed 

Provenience Number 

Mound A i 

Mound B 31 

Feature 33 4 

Feature 8 1 

Total 36 

Mound D 1 

Village site 31 

West border of site 1 

Top of post mold, N. 1840/E. 1570 1 

N. 1 860/E. 1580 2 

Feature 19 36 

Feature 17 8 

Feature 21 3 

Feature 23 1 

Feature 24 3 

Burial 18 1 

Total 88 

Grand total 126 



61 



Table 9. — Frequency and occurrence of straight rims, 
Saltillo Fabric Impressed 

Provenience Number 

Mound A 3 

Mound B 13 

Feature 33, west of mound B 1 

Burial 29 I 

Total 15 

Mound D 7 

Village site 26 

West border of site 3 

Fire pit, N. 2010/E. 1410 1 

Fire pit, N. 2020/E. 1320 1 

Fire pit, N. 2040 /E. 1490 1 

Feature 14 1 

Feature 16 4 

Feature 17 14 

Feature 19 32 

Feature 20 1 

Feature 21 1 

Total 85 

Grand total no 

Table 10. — Frequency and occurrence of miscellaneous rims, 
Saltillo Fabric Impressed 

Provenience Number 

Mound B 1 

Village site 3 

Feature 17 1 

Feature 19 1 

Total 5 

Mound D 1 

Grand total 7 

Table 11. — Frequency and occurrence of incurving rims, 
Furrs Cordmarked 

Provenience Number 

Mound B i 

Village site 1 6 

West border of site 8 

In dark area, N. 2080/E. 1 600 I 

Fire pit, N. 1 950/E. 1500 1 

Feature 23 7 

Feature 24 2 

Feature 29 1 

Burial 16 I 

Burial 20 1 

Burials 24 and 26 3 

Burial 24 6 

Burial 27 3 

Total 50 

Grand total 51 

62 



Table 12. — Frequency and occurrence of flaring rims, 
Furrs Cordmarked 

Provenience Number 

Village site 2 

West border of site i 

Total 3 

Table 13. — Frequency and occurrence of incurving rims, 
Tishomingo Cordmarked 

Provenience Number 
Mound A i 

Mound B io 

Village site 44 

In a dark area, N. 2080/E. 1600 2 

West border of site 5 

Fire pit, N. 1 950/E. 1 500 7 

Fire pit, N. 1 970/E. 1 500 1 

Fire pit, N. 2060/E. 1470 1 

Feature 14 1 

Feature 23 25 

Feature 24 2 

Burial 16 2 

Burial 20 1 

Burial 23 1 

Burial 24 9 

Burials 24 and 26 13 

Total 114 

Grand total 125 

Table 14. — Frequency and occurrence of flaring rims, 
Tishomingo Cordmarked 

Provenience Number 
Mound B i 

Village site: 

West border of site I 

Feature 23 2 

Total 3 

Grand total 4 

Table 15. — Frequency and occurrence of rim shapes, 
Tishomingo Plain 

FLARING RIMS 

Provenience Number 
Mound B 2 

Village site: 

West border of site 1 

Burial 18 1 

Total 2 

Total flaring rims 4 



Table 15. — Frequency and occurrence of rim shapes, 
Tishomingo Plain — Continued 

INCURVING RIMS 

Provenience Number 

Mound B I 

Village site 5 

West border of site 5 

Feature 17 1 

Burial 18 I 

Pit containing burials 24 and 26 1 

Total 13 

Total incurving rims 14 

RIGHT ANGLE EVERTED RIMS 

Village site I 

West border of site 2 

Total 3 

Total all rims 21 

Table 16. — Frequency and occurrence of rim shapes, 
Houlka Gray 

FLARING RIMS 

Provenience Number 

Mound B 5 

Village site 4 

West border of site I 

Feature 17 1 

Feature 19 1 

Burial 24 1 

Total 8 

Total flaring rims 13 

STRAIGHT RIMS 

Mound B 1 

Village site 8 

West border of site I 

Feature 16 1 

Feature 19 2 

Feature 23 1 

Total 13 

Total straight rims 14 

Total all rims 27 

Table 17. — Frequency and occurrence of Marksville 
Stamped and Incised 

MARKSVILLE STAMPED 

Provenience Number 

Mound B: Pit floor ' 



Table 17. — Frequency and occurrence of Marksville 
Stamped and Incised — Continued 



marksville stampbd — continued 



Provenience 

Village site 

Feature 16. 
Feature 20 



Number 

2 

1 

21 



Total 

Grand total 



24 



25 



MARKSVILLE INCIShD 



Mound B 



Table 1 8. — Frequency and occurrence of limestone-tempered 

sherds 

Provenience Number 

Mound B: 

0.3 foot below surface 1 

0.6 foot above mound floor in fill (may be in intrusive ditch) ... I 



Total 



Village site: 

Surface, 0—0.5 loot 

Feature 16, plow line to 3 feet in fire pit 

Feature 17, in level II 

Feature 19, plow line to 1 foot 

Depth 1 to 2 feet 

Feature 23, plow line to 0.3 foot 



Total 

Grand total 



15 



17 



Table 19. — Frequency and occurrence of single cord- 
impressed shreds 



Provenience 
Feature 16: Plow line to 3 feet in fire pit 
Feature 17: 

Below plow line 

Plow line to 0.7 foot below 

Feature 19: 

Plow line to 1 foot 

Depth, 3 to 4 feet 

Feature 23: Plow line to 0.6 foot 

Feature 24: Plow line to 0.5 to 1 foot below 
Mound B: Bottom of fire pit 



Number 
1 



Total 



Table 20. — Frequency and occurrence of Alexander Incised 



RIM SI11RDS 



Provenience 
Mound B: Feature 33 
Mound I): 0.8 foot from surface in fill 

Total, rim sherds 



Number 
I 
1 



63 



Table 20. — Frequency and occurrence of Alexander 
Incised — Continued 

ALMOST RIM SHERDS 

Provenience Number 

Village site 2 

Feature 1 7, below plow line I 

Total, almost rim sherds 3 

BODY SHERDS 

Mound B: Feature 10 2 

Village site: Feature 24, 0.5 foot depth 1 

Total, body sherds 3 

Total, all sherds 8 

Table 21. — Frequency and occurrence of miscellaneous 
incised sherds 

Provenience Number 

Mound B: 

Feature 1 o, below fire pit 1 

Feature 33 1 

Total 2 

Village site 4 

Feature 19, post mold I 

Feature 24, post mold 1 

Total 6 

Mound D: 

Fill, 2.2 feet above old sod 1 

Top of old sold 1 

Total 2 

Grand total 10 

Table 22. — Frequency and occurrence of bone-tempered 

shreds 

Provenience Number 
Village site 3 

Table 23. — Stone object provenience 

The lithic artifact yield of the entire Bynum site is so limited 
that the following brief summary will account for every stone 
implement recorded: 

MOUNT) A 

No lithic artifacts were intentionally buried in central tomb feature. Fill 
inclusions were — 

i end scraper on flake, retouched, 
i ovate blank, percussion flaked. 

MOUND B 

Feature 8, central tomb: 

27 green schistose celts, polished entire. 
2 fine-grained greenstone celts, polished entire. 
19 barb haft spear points. 
1 mano in fill 0.4 foot above pit floor. 
Surface of mound B: 1 pitted sandstone. 



Table 23. — Stone object provenience — Continued 

MOUND D 

Feature 35, central tomb: 1 green schistose celt, polished entire. 
Mound fill: 1 grinding stone, metate fragment, 0.3 foot below sod line. 

MOUND F 

On eroded surface: 1 green schistose celt, polished entire. 

VILLAGE SITE 

Feature 19, in molds of circular post mold strucrure: 

1 simple haft flake point. 

3 leaf-shaped knives. 
Feature 16, refuse pit: 

1 leaf-shaped flaked knife. 

1 ovate blank, flaked. 
Feature 24, intrusive upon circular pattern of post molds: 1 miniature green- 
stone celt, polished entire in rectangular pit at same level as Chickashaw 
graves. 
In post molds unassociated with structural features: 

1 discoidal polished stone fragment, depth 0.4 foot below plow line. 

I triangular small arrowhead, depth 1 foot to 2 feet below plow line. 
Surface of village to bottom of plow zone: 

15 metates or grinding stones, none entire, sandstone. 

II manos, including 6 fragments, sandstone. 

12 pitted sandstones, probably for use in cupping the ends of drills, 9 
complete. 

1 drilled slate pendent, rectangular. 

1 discoidal, fragment, polished. 

2 projectile points, straight base. 
10 projectile points, simple haft. 
12 triangular projectile points. 

2 side-notched projectile points. 

4 knives, leaf-shaped. 

4 side scrapers on flakes. 

1 end scraper on flake. 

2 flaked drills. 

Table 24. — Stone object measurements 

Types and measurements (in centimeters) of lithic implements 
at Bynum site may be summarized as follows: 

29 polished celts from feature 8, mound B: 

Length: Maximum, 31.7; minimum, 13.8; average, 21.2. 
Width: Maximum, 9.5; minimum, 5.6; average, 7.5. 
Thickness: Maximum, 5.8; minimum, 4.0; average, 4.9. 

1 polished celt from feature 35, mound D: 

Length: 16.0. 
Width: 6.9. 
Thickness: 4.0. 

1 polished celt from mound F surface: 

Length: 19.4. 
Width: 7.5. 
Thickness: 5.0. 

1 fragmentary polished celt from mound A surface. 

1 crude partly polished sandstone celt from village surface: 

Length: 10.5. 
Width: 4.7. 
Thickness: 2.7. 



64 



Table 24. — Stone object measurements — Continued 



Table 24- — Stone object measurements — Continued 



i miniature celt from association with historic Chickasaw occupation. 

Length: 5.5. 
Width: 4.3. 
Thickness: 1.8. 

19 flared stem to barbed shoulder projectile points (type A) from feature 
8, mound B (all complete): 

Length: Maximum, 9.6; minimum, 7.3; average, 8.4. 
Width: Maximum, 4.7; minimum, 3.2; average, 3.9. 
Thickness: Maximum, 1.0; minimum, 0.6; average 0.8. 

12 simple haft flaked points (type B), 7 complete, village site: 

Length: Maximum, 6.5; minimum, 3.5; average, 5.0. 
Width: Maximum, 2.4; minimum, 1.6; average, 2.1. 
Thickness: Maximum, 1.2; minimum, 0.8; average, 1.0. 

2 expanding stem flaked projectile points (type C), 1 complete, village site: 

Length: 2.4. 
Width: 1.4. 
Thickness: 0.4. 

13 triangular small flaked projectile points (type D), 4 complete, village site: 

Length: Maximum, 2.7; minimum, 1.8; average, 2.2. 
Width: Maximum, 2.0; minimum, 1.4; average, 1.7. 
Thickness: Maximum, 0.7; minimum, 0.4; average, 0.6. 

2 square-based projectile points (type E) flaked, 1 complete, village site: 

Length: 5.4. 
Width: 2.5. 
Thickness: 0.7. 

9 knives, leaf-shaped, flaked, 6 complete, village site: 

Length: Maximum, 5.8; minimum, 3.7; average, 5.2. 
Width: Maximum, 2.5; minimum, 1.6; average, 2.2. 
Thickness: Maximum, 1.3; minimum, 0.9; average, 10. 

2 drills, flaked, village site, both incomplete. 
4 side scrapers on flake, village site, all complete: 

Length: Maximum, 5.0; minimum, 3.1; average, 4.2. 
Width: Maximum, 1.8; minimum, 1.2; average, 1.5. 
Thickness: Maximum, 0.9; minimum, 0.4; average, 0.6. 

2 end scrapers on flake, village site (1), mound A fill (1) (both complete): 

Length: 6 — 4. 
Width: 6—4. 
Thickness: 1.5 — 1.7. 

2 ovate blanks, complete, village site (1), mound A fill (1): 

Length: 7.0 — 5.5. 
Width: 5.4 — 3.5. 
Thickness: 2.3 — 1.2. 

18 metates, all fragments (no measurements) village site (except 1 from 
mound D fill): 



1 1 manos, 5 complete, village site: 

Length: Maximum, 10. 1; minimum, 8.3; average, 8.8. 
Width: Maximum, 8.1; minimum, 5.1; average, 6.6. 
Thickness: Maximum, 3.6; minimum, 2.7; average, 3.2. 

12 pitted stones, 9 complete, village site: 

Length: Maximum, 10.5; minimum, 5.6; average, 9.1. 
Width: Maximum, 8.4; minimum, 4.5; average, 6.8. 
Thickness: Maximum, 4.6; minimum, 2.7; average, 3.5. 

Table 23. — Measurements and indices of Bynum site skulls 



Glabello-occipital length 

Maximum breadth 

Basion-bregma height 

Auricular height 

Minimum frontal diameter 

Nasion-basion length 

Basion-prosthion length 

Frontal chord 

Frontal subtense 

Total facial breadth 

Total facial height 

Upper facial height 

Nasal height 

Nasal breadth 

Left orbital height 

Left orbital breadth (dac.) 

External palate length 

External palate breadth 

Condylo-symphyseal length 

Bicondylar breadth 

Bigonial breadth 

Minimum breadth, ascending 

ramus 

Symphysis height 

Gonial angle 



Length-breadth index. . 
Mean height index. . . . 
Frontal curve index. . . . 

Total facial index 

Upper facial index 

Nasal index 

Left orbital index 

External palatal index . 
Mandibular index 



No. 16, 
Male 



' (184) 
(130) 



41 



(70.65) 



No. 18, 
Male 



183 

146 

147 

125 

95 

105 

100 

118 

26 

141 

125 

70 

50 

26 

34 

41 

55 



(109) 
132 
107 



34 
121 



79.78 
80.05 
22.03 
88.65 
49.64 
52.00 
82.93 



82.58 



No. 19, 
Female 



168 

137 

136 

113 

91 

95 

93 

108 

27 

127 

118 

69 

46 

28 

36 

39 

52 

(67) 

(98) 



(29) 
35 



81.55 
81.25 
25.00 
92.91 
54.33 
60.87 
92.31 
128. 85 



No. 20, 
Female 



(174) 
130 



(74.71) 



No. 23, 
Male 



177 + 



(114) 



114 

28 



114 

67 

48 

25 

33 

37 

49 

63 

101 

116 

101 

32 

32 

133 



24.56 



52.08 

88.19 

128. 57 

87.07 



1 Parentheses indicate approximate measurement or index. 



65 



Table 26. — Long bone measurements and indices of the Bynum site skeletons 





No. 16, male 


No. IS 


, male 


No. 19, 


female 


No. 20, 


female 


No. 22, female (?) 


No. 23, 


male (?) 


No. 24, 


female 




Right 


Left 


Right 


Left 


Right 


Left 


Right 


Left 


Right 


Left 


Right 


Left 


Right 


Left 


Femur: 

Bicondylar length 




452 

455 

89 

19.6 

372 

96 

25.8 


(431) 


504 

506 

93 

18.4 

429 

90 

21.0 

367 

71 

19.3 

280 

45 

16.1 

300 


413 

419 

85 

20.3 

339 

79 

23.3 


415 

421 

88 

20.9 

340 

81 

23.8 


394 

400 

74 

18.5 

327 

70 

21.4 


396 

403 

77 

19.1 

330 

70 

21.2 

279 

51 

18.3 

213 

33 

15.5 


425 

427 

85 

19.9 


(420) 

(427) 

(355) 


416 

420 

86 

20.5 

343 

84 

24.5 

301 
66 

21.9 

229 

38 

16.6 

245 


416 

418 

88 

21.0 

349 

83 

23.8 

303 
65 

21.4 

228 

35 

15.4 

243 


414 

420 

87 

20.7 




Maximum length 






Midshaft circumference 
Midshaft index 






Tibia: 

Maximum length 






Midshaft circumference 








Midshaft index 










Humerus: 








308 

65 

21.1 

238 

49 

20.6 
























Midshaft index 




















Radius: 

Maximum length 




240 

51 

21.2 








214 

37 

17.3 


231 


227 

49 

21.6 


23" 










41 








17 ( 


Ulna: Maximum length. . . . 



































66 



Bibliography 



LITERATURE CITED 



Bennett, John. 

1940. News Letter. Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Vol. 2, No. 

3. Mimeographed. 
194 1 . News Letter. Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Vol. 3, 
No. 4. Mimeographed. 
Brown, Calvin S. 

1926. Archaeology of Mississippi. Mississippi Geological Survey, Uni- 
versity of Mississippi. 
Collins, Henry B. Jr. 

1926. Archeological and Anthropometrical Work in Mississippi, Explora- 
tion and Field Work at the Smithsonian Institution in 1925. 
Smithsonian Institution Miscellaneous Collection, Vol. 78, No. 1, 
pp. 91-92- 
1932. Excavations at a Prehistoric Indian Village Site in Mississippi. 
Proceedings of the U. S. National Museum, Vol. 79, Art. 32, 
Washington. 
Cotter, John L. 

1948. Archeological Survey of Bynum Site, Chickasaw County. The 
Journal of Mississippi History, Vol. 10, pp. 116-118, Jackson. 
1950. The Miller Pottery Types in Review. Southern Indian Studies, 
Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 25-29, Chapel Hill, N. C. 
DeJarnette, David L. 

1 94 1. Progress Report on Archaelogical Investigations in Alabama, ms. 

in Natchez Trace Parkway files. 
DeJarnette, David L , and Steve B. Wimberly. 

1941. The Bessemer Site; Excavation of Three Mounds and Surrounding 

Village Areas Near Bessemer, Alabama. Geological Survey of 
Alabama, Museum Paper 17, University of Alabama. 
Dellinger, S. C, and S. D. Dickinson. 

1942. Pottery from the Ozark Bluff Shelters. American Antiquity, Vol. 

7, pp. 276-290, Menasha. 
Ford, J. A. 

1935. Ceramic Decoration Sequence at an Old Indian Village Site Near 

Sicily Island, La. Anthropological Study No. 1, Louisiana De- 
partment of Conservation, New Orleans. 

1936. Analysis of Indian Village Site Collections from Louisiana and 

Mississippi. Anthropological Study No. 2, Louisiana Depart- 
ment of Conservation, New Orleans. 

Ford, J. A., and George I. Quimby, Jr. 

'945- The Tchefuncte Culture, an Early Occupation of the Lower Missis- 
sippi Valley. Society for American Archaeology Memoir No. 2, 
Menasha. 

Ford, J. A., and Gordon Willey. 

1940. Crooks Site, a Marksville Period Burial Mound in LaSalle Parish, 

Louisiana. Anthropological Study No. 3, Louisiana Geological 
Survey, New Orleans. 

1941. An Interpretation of the Prehistory of the Eastern United States. 

American Anthropologist, Vol. 43, pp. 325-363. 



Griffin, James B. 

1938. The Ceramic Remains from Norris Basin, Tennessee. In an archae- 

ological Survey of the Norris Basin in Eastern Tennessee by 
William S. Webb, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 118, 
PP- 253-359. 

1939. Report on the Ceramics of Wheeler Basin. In An Archaeological 

Survey of Wheeler Basin on the Tennessee River in Northern Ala- 
bama by William S. Webb, Bureau of American Ethnology, 
Bulletin 122, pp. 127-165. 

1 94 1. News Letter. Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Vol. 2, No. 

4. Mimeographed. 

1942. Adena Pottery. American Antiquity, Vol. 7, pp. 344-358, Menasha. 

1945. The Ceramic Affiliations of the Ohio Valley Adena Culture. In 

The Adena People by William S. Webb and Charles S. Snow. 
Publications of the Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, 
University of Kentucky, Lexington. 

1946. Cultural Change and Continuity in Eastern United States Archae- 

ology. In Man in Northeastern North America, Papers of the 
Peabody Foundation for Archaeology, Vol. 3, Andover, Mass. 
Haag, William G. 

1942a. Early Horizons in the Southeast. American Antiquity, Vol. 7, 

pp. 209-222, Menasha. 
1942b. A Description and Analysis of the Pickwick Pottery. In An 
Archaeological Survey of Pickwick Basin by William S. Webb and 
D. L. DeJarnette, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 129, 
PP- 513-526. 
Jennings, Jesse D. 

1941. Chickasaw and Earlier Indian Cultures of Northeast Mississippi. 

The Journal of Mississippi History, Vol. 3, pp. 155-226. 
1944. Archaeological Survey of the Natchez Trace. American Antiquity, 
Vol. 9, pp. 408-415. 
Lewis, T. M. N., and Madeline Kneberc. 

1941. The Prehistory of the Chickamauga Basin in Tennessee. Tennes- 
see Anthropological Papers No. 1. 

1946. Hiwassee Island, An Archaeological Account of Four Tennessee 

Indian Peoples. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. 

1947. The Archaic Horizon in Western Tennessee. The University of 

Tennessee Record F.xtension Seiies. Vol. 23, No. 4, Knoxville, 
Tenn. 
Lowe, E. N. 

1919. Mississippi, Its Geology, Geography, Soil and Mineral Resources. 
Mississippi State Geological Survey, Bulletin 14, Jackson. 
Martin, Paul S., George I. Quimby, and Donald Collier. 

1947. Indians Before Columbus. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 

MOOREHEAD, WaRREN K. 

1922. The Hopewell Mound Group of Ohio. Field Museum of Natural 
History. Anthropological Scries. Vol. VI, No. 5, Chicago, 
Illinois. 
Newell, H. Perry and Alex D. Kriigir. 

1949. The George C. Davis Site, Cherokee County. Texas. American 
Antiquity, Vol XIV, No. 4, Part 2 (Memoir No. 5). 



67 



Indiana Historical Society. 



Quimby, George I., Jr. 

1 94 1. The Goodall Focus. 
Steward, Julian H. 

1947. American Culture History in the Light of South America. South- 

western Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 3, pp. 85-108. 
Albuquerque. 
Southeastern News Letter. Two volumes. William Haag, Editor. 

Mimeographed. 
Squier, E. G. and E. H. Davis. 

1848. Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley. Contributions to 
Knowledge, Vol. 1, Smithsonian Institution. 
Wauchope, Robert. 

1948. The Ceramic Sequence in the Etowah Drainage, Northwest Georgia. 

American Antiquity, Vol. 13, pp. 201-209, Menasha, Wis. 
Webb William S. 

1938. An Archaeological Survey of the Norris Basin in Eastern Tennes- 
see. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 118, Washington. 



1939. An Archaeological Survey of Wheeler Basin on the Tennessee River 
in Northern Alabama. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 
122, Washington. 
Webb, William S., and David L. DeJarnette. 

1942. An Archaeological Survey of Pickwick Basin in the Adjacent Por- 
tions of the States of Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee. Bu- 
reau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 129, Washington. 

1948. The Whitesburg Bridge Site Ma v io. Geological Survey of Ala- 
bama, Museum Paper 24, University of Alabama. 
Webb, William S., and Charles E. Snow. 

1945. The Adena People. Publications of the Department of Anthro- 
pology and Archaeology, University of Kentucky, Vol. 6, 
Lexington. 
Wimberly, Steve B., and Harry A. Tourtelot. 

1 94 1. The McQuorquodale Mound, a Manifestation of the Hopewcllian 
Phase in South Alabama. Geological Survey of Alabama, Mu- 
seum Paper No. 10, University of Alabama. 



68 



Plates 1-20 



69 






Plate I . — Provenience of figures 

Figure No.: Provenience 

1 Mound D. 

2 Do. 

3 Do. 

4 Feature 19, village site. 

5 Village site. 

6 Do. 

7 Feature 19, village site. 

8 Do. 

9 Do. 

10 Village site. 

11 Feature 17, village site. 

12 Village site. 

13 Do. 

14 Mound D, rim molds. 

15 Feature 19, village site. 

16 Village site. 

17 Feature 19, village site. 

18 Village site. 

19 Feature 19, village site. 

20 Mound B fill. 

21 Feature 19, village site. 

22 Do. 

23 Feature 17, village site. 

24 Mound D. 

25 Village site. 

26 Feature 19, village site. 

27 Do. 

28 Village site. 

29 Burial 27, village site. 

30 Village site. 

31 Mound D. 

32 Feature 28, village site. 

Note. — All figures are Baldwin Plain. 



70 




71 



Plate 2. — Provenience of figures 

Figure No. : Provenience 

1 Feature 19, village site. 

2 Village site. 

3 Feature 19, village site. 

4 Village site. 

5 Mound B, 0.4 foot from surface 

in fill. 

6 Village site. 

7 Do. 

8 Mound B, bottom of fire pit. 

9 Do. 

10 Village site. 

11 Feature 33, mound B. 

12 Village site. 

13 Do. 

14 Feature 19, village site. 

15 Mound A, in fill. 

16 Feature 8, mound B. 

17 Feature 19, village site. 

18 Feature 17, village site. 

19 Mound D, 1 foot below old sod. 

20 Feature 19, village site. 

21 Village site. 

22 Do. 

23 Mound B, ash layer above clay. 

24 Feature 33, mound B. 

25 Feature 20, village site. 

Note. — All figures arc Baldwin Plain, except No. 25, Marksville Stamped. 



72 




73 



Plate 3. — Provenience of figures 

Saltillo Fabric Impressed 
flaring rims 

Figure No. : Provenience 

1 Village site. 

2 Mound B. 

3 Do. 

4 Do. 

5 Feature 24, village site. 

6 Mound B. 

STRAIGHT RIMS 

7 Village site. 

8 Feature 21, mound D. 

9 Mound D. 

10 Village site. 

11 Feature 31, mound D. 

12 Feature 16, village site. 

13 Mound A. 

14 Feature 17, village site. 

15 Feature 8, mound B. 

STRAIGHT COL. 

16 Feature 32, mound D. 

RIGHT ANGLE EVERTED 

17 Feature 32, mound D. 

MISCELLANEOUS 

18 West border of site. 

STRIPPED RIMS 

19 Feature 19, village site. 

20 Village site. 

FURRS CORDMARKED 

21 Village site. 

22 Burial 24, village site. 

23 Village site. 

24 Burials 24 and 26, village site. 

25 Burial 24, village site. 

26 Village site. 

27 West border of site. 

28 Burial 27, village site. 

29 Village site. 

Tishomingo Cordmarked 

30 Village site. 

31 Burials 24 and 26, village site. 

32 Feature 23, village site. 

33 Village site. 

34 Feature 23, village site. 

35 Do. 



74 



IO 



\. y 




V :: 




<0 




V^^zzr^ 5 



V- 



o 

ro 



0> 

(M 



UJ 

< 






10 



\^ T 



H. 



/" 



\r 






\ 



<^ 




CM 



X> 






y; 



v^" 








A$3 






<t= 



v 



.-'' 





891131 0—51- 



75 



Plate 4. — Provenience of figures 

Figure No. : Provenience Type 

1 Mound B Tishomingo plain. 

2 Burial 18, village site Do. 

3 Village site Do. 

4 do Do. 

5 do Do. 

6 do Houlka Gray. 

7 Mound B Do. 

8 Feature 19, village site Do. 

9 Feature 10, mound B Do. 

10 Feature 16, village site Marksville Stamped. 

11 Mound D Alexander Incised. 

12 Feature 19, village site Miscellaneous. 

13 Mound B Do. 

14 Feature 10, mound B Alexander Incised. 

15 Mound D Miscellaneous. 

16 Village site Do. 

17 do Do. 

18 Feature 19, village site Single cord impressed. 

19 Feature 17, village site Do. 

20 Village site Marksville Stamped. 

21 Mound A Miscellaneous. 






76 





6 



8 




10 








m 



W 



u 



cz: 



18 



12 




15 




eg 



13 




fVj 

16 



Mn 




19 




Na 



21 



20 



10 12 3 INCHES 

I i t i i 1 1 1 



PLATE 4 



77 



Plate 5 

Figure 1-4 — Spear points. 

Figure 5-10 — Celts. 

Figure 11 and 12— Large saltillo fabric impressed pottery fragments. 

Plate 5. — Provenience of figures 

Figure No . : Provenience 

1 Feature 8, mound B. 

2 Do. 

3 Do. 

4 Do. 

5 Mound B. 

6 Mound F. 

7 Mound B. 

8 Do. 

9 Do. 

10 Do. 

11 Feature 17, village site. 

12 Do. 



78 







\ 



I. At «• 



I 



4 






4 




I 2 

J 1 




8 





I « 



•;■:.-' 


o /' 2* 
i t ' 




/ 

? 


PLATE 5 


^l 


i 

V 






f o a* ♦' 

I : ■ / i i i 


1 


1 J 



II 



79 



Plate 6. 



Figure No 
1. . 
2.. 
3.. 
4.. 
5.. 
6.. 
7.. 
8.. 
9.. 
10. 
11. 



— Provenience of Chickasaw grave goods 

Object Provenience 

Shell gorget Burial 18, on neck. 

Silver crown Burial 18, on head. 

Powder flask spout Burial 18, thoracic area. 

Galvanized iron cup Burial 18, on chest. 

Glass beads Burial 25, upper body area. 

. . . do Burial 17, body area. 

Glass and shell beads Burial 20, neck. 

Glass beads Burial 17, body area. 

.... do Burial 19, neck. 

do Burial 21, neck. 

do Burial 22, neck. 



80 




81 



Plate 7. — Provenience of ground stone artifacts 

Figure No. : Object Provenience 

1 Sandstone celt Village surface. 

2 Drilled slate fragment Village, plow zone. 

3 Discoidal fragment, hematite Village, 0.4 foot below plow 

line. 
4 Miniature greenstone celt. . . Feature 24, 0.1 foot below 

plow line. 

5 Smoothed and pitted sand- Mound B, 0.4 foot above 

stone rock. feature 8 floor. 

6 Pitted sandstone rock Village surface. 

7 Mano or hand grinder, frag- Do. 

ment. 
8 Pitted sandstone rock Village, 0.6 foot below plow 

line. 

9 do Mound B, surface. 

10 do Village, 0.4 foot below plow 

line. 

11 Metate or mortar Village surface. 

12 do West border of mound A 

surface. 



82 







* 








: 






3 4 



CFNTIMETE.RS 




PLATE 7 




83 



Plate 8. — Provenience of figures 

Figure No. : Provenience Sherd type 

1 Fire pit, village site Fabric Impressed. 

2 Feature 14, village site Do. 

3 Feature 17, village site Do. 

4 Village site Do. 

5 do Do. 

6 do Do. 

7 Mound D Do. 

8 Feature 19, village site Do. 

9 Village site Furrs Cordmarked. 

10 Burial 24, village site Do. 

11 Village site Do. 

12 Post mold, village site Do. 



84 




10 



m^ 



PLATE 8 






85 



Plate 9. — Provenience of figures 

Figure No.: Provenience Sherd type 

1 Fire pit, village site Furrs Cordmarked. 

2 do Do. 

3 Feature 23, village site Do. 

4 Refuse pit (burials 24 and Do. 

26), village site. 

5 Feature 23, village site Tishomingo Cordmarked. 

6 do Do. 

7 Refuse pit (burials 24 and Do. 

26), village site. 

8 Feature 23, village site Do. 

9 Village site Do. 

10 Fire pit, village site Do. 

11 Feature 23 pit, village site. . Do. 

12 Village site Do. 

13 Mound B Do. 



86 







WW 5 




,.\ &**> 



#11 : 

fe ! < f ; 'NM' ills 

A,'"*- Hull ilihin >t\ ' 

if ftl P ill 



(»!»/"(! 




a -ii w ■■■ / w 



r • 

8 





t M ;M! 





ftf^/ 


> 

A- ■ 

V'T -i Ji 


t Y 




•r^V^'' 


.',)'•■ 


f '" ~*» 


f pi ' 
I I 








O I 
U_l I l L 



PLATE 9 




13 



87 



Plate 10. — Provenience of figures 

Sherds 

Figure No. : Provenience Typ* 

1 Feature 19, village site Houlka Gray. 

2 Village site Do. 

3 Mound B Do. 

4 Feature 23 pit, village site. . Do. 

5 Mound B Miscellaneous. 

6 do Do. 

7 do Do. 

8 Feature 19, village site Limestone. 

9 Feature 23, village site Do. 

10 Feature 19, village site Single cordmarked. 

11 do Do. 

12 Feature 8, mound B Miscellaneous. 

13 Feature 10, mound B Do. 

14 do Do. 

15 Village site Do. 

16 Feature 24, village site Do 

Flaked Stone 

17 Feature 19, plow line to 1 Fragment type indeterminate. 

foot in mold. 

18 Mound B border, 0.4 foot Type B. 

below sod in fill. 

19 Feature 24, surface to plow Stemless, copena type. 

line. 

20 Village, in sod Fragment, knife (?). 

21 Feature 16 pit, 3 feet below Knife. 

plow line. 

22 Village surface Type B. 

23 Village surface to plow line. Do. 

24 do Do. 

25 Village, 0.2 foot below Knife. 

surface. 

26 Village surface Knife or stemless point. 

27 do Fragment knife. 



88 







a 







7 





23 24 



l__i i — i — L 



/ " 

t 

• • : 



14 




1 



.:<* 






18 



25 26 



PLATE 10 




89 



Plate 1 1 . — Copper spools 

Figure I a, b — Top and side view of copper spools as they probably appeared originally. 

Figure 2 a-d — Component parts of a copper spool; 2a and 2d are crowns, 2b and 2c are flanged funnels. 

Figure 3 — Copper spool with lead filling on both sides. 

Figure 4 — Copper spool with only one side lead filled. 

Figure 5 — Galena and clay filled spool, copied from Dejarnette (1941). 

Figures 6 and 7 — Photographs of copper spools found in mound A. 



90 



•4% 


A- 




» . 


» ' 


> 






i > 


t , 


*'. 


\ 1 


1 


| * } 




\^'' 



ID 




+0£M *Q 




1^- 




CO 



O 



; 



OJ 



O- 




W 



>A 






CD 









i ; 



-#»'"" 




< 
Q- 



891131 0—51 7 



91 



Plate 12 

Figure l — Village site: Burial 22, an historic Chickasaw rectangular grave. Silver crescent gorget beneath jaw. Arrow points north. This burial was 

intrusive upon feature 24 post mold circles. 

Figure 2 — Village site: Burial 18, an historical Chickasaw rectangular grave containing male adult with silver crown, and a quantity of other grave goods, includ- 
ing parts of a flint lock. 

Figure 3. — Mound A, burial 1, showing copper spools on wrists. String covers skull fragments. Bones were badly decomposed. 

Figure 4 — Village site: Burial 23 flexed adult in oval pit with numerous fresh-water shells. 



92 




CsJ 

UJ 

< 

-I 
Q- 





93 



Plate 13. — Provenience of flaked stone artifacts 

Figure No.: Type Provenience 

1 D Village surface. 

2 D Feature 14, post mold, 1-2 

feet below plow line. 
3 C Village, fire pit 0.5-1 foot 

below plow line. 

4 D Village site, plow line. 

5 D Village surface. 

6 Key drill Do. 

7 Drill Village, surface to plow line. 

8 D Village, 0.2 foot below plow 

line. 

9 D Village, plow line. 

10 Side scraper Village surface. 

11 do Do. 

12 B Do. 

13 Knife Do. 

14 B Village, 0.4 foot below plow 

line. 
15 End scraper Mound A, 0.2 foot above 

floor in mound fill. 
16 Ovate blank Village, fire pit, plow line to 

1.5 feet below. 
17 do Feature 16, fire pit, 3 feet 

below plow line. 



94 



•5* 



I*. 





4 



5 








8 







10 



r\ 



( 



MjjSft 



II 




12 



I i L 



INCHES 





16 



i_i i ■ i 






\ 




13 




14 




INCHES 



95 



Plate 14. — Provenience of historic Chickasaw grave goods 

Figure No. : "Type Provenience 

1 Copper wire ear ornament. . . Burial 18, under head. 

2 and 5 do Burial 18, by head. 

3 and 4.. Pendants probably attached Do. 

to ear ornaments Figs. 2 

and 5. 

6 Copper bells Burial 25, body area. 

7 Silver brooch Burial 18, thoracic area. 

8 Lead button Burial 25, body area. 

9 Gun cock screw Burial 18, thoracic area. 

10 Gunflint Burial 18, right arm. 

11 Flint gunlock Do. 

13 and 14 Knife blades Burial 18, thoracic area. 

12 Iron spoon Burial 20. 

15 Silver spoon Burial 17. 

16 Iron tomahawk pipe Burial 18, near head. 

17 Iron spike Burial 18, thoracic area. 

18 Iron artifact Do. 

19 Crescent gorget, silver Burial 22, lower neck. 



96 










3 4 



13 





10 



14 





"£*mim 



17 




PLATE 14 



97 



Plate 15 

Figure i — Mound A from south, before excavation. Men are standing in cellar pit. 

Figure 2 — Mound A during excavation, with canvas covering enlarged cellarpit. Mound B appears at right. Village site is beyond mounds A and B. 

Figure 3 — Mound A interior showing E. 1655 profile. Bottom of rod marks end of west long framing central burial group. 

Figure 4 — Mound D showing central rectangular pit with branch molds at west rim and deep circular fire pit in middle. Three of the four deep post holes at 

corners of primary pit have been excavated. Grid placed against E. 1760 profile. 



98 




99 



Plate 16 

Figure I — Mound B showing west rim of central pit (features 8 and 10 being developed beneath E. 1740 profile. Sagging of loads over central pit, loose and 

pocketed fill immediately above pit floor is shown. 

Figure 2 — Mound B from east. Central pit (features 8 and 10) exposed to E. 1745 profile. 

Figure 3 — Mound B central pit after stripping floor to reveal deep post holes. Poles indicate slant of east ends of holes, which sometimes retained bark impres- 
sions. Village site beyond and to left. 

Figure 4 — Mound B central pit showing surface features, rim molds and artifacts intact 



100 




Jjf" 

'«. V* ~ «* 





! rO 



101 



Plate 17 

Figure I — Village site: Feature 14 post mold circle, diameter 65 feet. Trench has been cut inside circle to section molds. Stakes mark molds inside circle, 

which have been trenched around. 

Figure 2 — Village site: Feature 22, post mold circle, diameter 14 feet. 

Figure 3 — Village site: Feature 19 post mold circle, diameter 56 feet. Trench cut inside circle. 



102 





LlI 

< 

-I 
Q_ 



103 



Plate 18 

Figure I — Removing master section of Mound B, central pit covered with canvas, mound A appears beyond. 

Figure 2. — Mound B, central pit (feature 8) showing detail of floor. Burial 8, cremation at right. Between horizontal log molds is cache of seven flaked 

points and four celts 

Figure 3 — Village site: Feature 30, refuse pit, showing pot fragments. 

Figure 4 — Mound A: Detail of feature 7 post mold circle beneath floor of northeast quadrant. 



104 



&zn 






ro 



105 



Plate 19 

(Upper) Facial and side views of No. 1 8 from the Bynum site. A middle-aged to old male from the historic Chickasaw reoccupation. 
(Lower) Side view of No. 23 from the Bynum site. A middle-aged male from the prehistoric village site. 



106 




891131 O — 51 8 



107 



Plate 20 

(Upper) Facial and side views of No. 19 from the Bynum site. A young adult female from the historic Chickasaw reoccupation. 
(Lower) Facial and side views of the U. S. N. M. 377.995, a young adult female from a historic Chickasaw grave near Tupelo. 



108 



PLATE 20 







109 



r N D E X 



Acorns — 48. 

Adena: agreement of Bynum with — 55; complex — 32; galena — 39; 

mounds — 38; post mold patterns — 51, 52. 
Agriculture — 1, 55. 

Alabama — 1, 20, 31, 32, 34, 37, 38, 40, 41, 45, 52, 56, 57. 
Alexander Incised pottery — 17, 21, 23, 24, 27 29. 
Alexander series — 30, 31, 32, 33, 54. 
Anderson, Miss Joyce — IV. 
Archaic— 33, 54, 57. 
Atlatl — 1. 

Baldwin Plain pottery — 9, 14, 17, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 54. 

Baumer culture — 30. 

Bobcat — 49. 

Bone artifacts, lack of — 55. 

Bone-tempered pottery — 22, 30. 

Boyd Mounds — 2. 

Burials: No. 1 — -6, 10, 42; No. 2 — 6, 10, 42; No. 3 — -6, 10, 42; No. 4 — 6, 
10, 42; No. 5 — 9, 42; No. 6 — 9, 42; No. 7 — 9, 42; No. 8 — 14, 42, 43; 
No. 9 — 9, 42; No. 10 — 9, 42; No. 11 — 14, 43; No. 12 — 14, 15, 43; No. 
13 — 14, 15; No. 14 — 14, 15, 43; No. 15 — 14, 15, 43; No. 16 — 12, 14, 
15, 29, 43; No. 17 — 10, 14, 15, 43, 44; No. 18 — 15, 43, 44, 50; No. 
19 — 15, 43, 44; No. 20 — 15, 43, 44; No. 21 — 10, 14, 43; No. 22 — 10, 
14, 16, 43, 44; No. 23 — 16, 43, 44, 50; No. 24 — 16, 29, 43, 44, 47, 50; 
No. 25 — 10, 14, 16, 43; No. 26 — 16, 29, 43, 44, 47, 50; No. 27 — 16, 
29; No. 28 — 16, 42; No. 29 — 16, 42; No. 30 — 9; Chickasaw — 2, 14, 15, 
16; cremation — 2, 8, 9, 11, 16, 38, 53, 55; flesh — 2, 8, 11, 53, 54; flexed — 
2,9, 11, 15, 53, 55. 

Burial Mound I and II — 2, 33, 40, 41, 45, 57. 

Bynum Mounds — 1; ecology of — 3; map of — VI; physiography of — 3. 

Cane — 47. 

Celts — 8, 9, 11, 39, 40, 57. 

Chickasaw Indian — IV, 1, 2, 11, 12, 32, 33, 39, 40, 46, 52, 56, 57; cranial 

deformation of — 45. 
Chickasaw County — 2, 20, 31. 
Chillicothe, Ohio — 36. 
Chocktaw — 1, 42. 
Coles Creek — 30, jj. 
Collins, Henry B. — 31, 42, 51. 
Copell period — 30, 33. 
Copena focus — 37, 38, 40, 41, 56, 57; agreement of Bynum with — 55; 

galena in sites of — 39; points — 39; post mold patterns of — 51, 52. 
Copper. (See also Copper spools.) — 14, 15, 16, 55, 57; bead — 38, 53; 

bells — 16; earrings — 16; working of — 36, 37, 38. 
Copper spools — 6, 8, 9, 11, 36, 38, 53, 55; method of lead filling — 37. 
Corn, absence of — 57. 
Crandall Mound skeletal material — 45. 
Cremation. (See Burials.) 
Crooks site — 20, 38, 39, 40, 41, 52. 
Cups: pewter — 16; tin — 14. 

Dallas focus — 40, 41. 

Deasonville site — 31, 39, 41, 52; complex — 31; post mold pattern of — 51. 

Deer — 3, 49. 

Dejarnettc, David L. — 32, 36, 37. 

Domestic cat — 49. 

Drury, Newton B. — V. 

Duck River — 52. 

Dunlap Fabric Impressed pottery — 31. 



Etowah, Ga. — 31. 

Features: No. 1 — 6; No. 2 — 6; No. 3—6; No. 5 — 6; No. 7 — 6, 10, 11, 12, 
22, 33, 34; No. 8 — 6, 11, 14, 16, 20, 22, 40, 41, 47; No. 10 — 21, 22; 
No. 11 — 21; No. 14 — 11, 12, 13, 19, 20, 33, 34; No. 16 — 12, 20, a, 34: 
No. 17 — 12, 21, 33, 47; No. 19 — 11, 12, 13, 20, 26, 33, 34, 37; No. 20 — 
11, 12, 13, 20, 26, a; No. 21 — 12, 13, 26, 33, 34; No. 22 — 11, 12, 13, 
26, 34; No. 23 — 12, 27, 33, 34, 50; No. 24 — 10, 11, 12, 21, 27, 33, 34, 
40, 50; No. 25 — 10, 14, 28, 33, 34; No. 26 — 14, 28, 33, 34; No. 27 — 14, 

28, a, 34, 37; No. 28—14, 28, a, 34; No. 29—14, 28, 33, 34; No. 30— 
14, 28, a, 34; No. 31—9; No. 32—9, 10, 29, 33, 34; No. 33—14, 21, 

29, 34; No. 34 — 9, 10; No. 35 — 9, 10, 11, 29, a, 34; No. 36 — 9; No. 
37, — 14, 29, 34; summary of — chart 3, p. 34. 

Fiber-tempered pottery — 21, 31, 33, 54. 
Files — 15. 
Flint — 15. 

Ford, James A. — 20, 30, 32, 54. 
Fox— 3, 49. 

Furrs Cordmarked pottery — 12, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 
29. 3°> 31. 32, 33. 34. 54- 

Galena — 8, 57; in copper spools — 36, 37, 38. 

Gardner, Malcolm — IV. 

Glass beads — 14, 15, 16. 

Goodhall focus — 39. 

Gordon Mounds — 2. 

Griffin, James B. — 20, 30, 31, 32, 54, 57. 

Grinders — 40. (See also Lithic artifacts.) 

Guntersville Basin — 37, 54. 

Hamilton focus — 39, 40, 41, 57. 
Harmon's Creek Cordmarked pottery — 31. 
Harrington, J. C. — IV. 
Hematite: chunky stone — 40. 

Hickory nuts — 47. 
Hiwassee Island focus — 38, 40; post mold pattern of — 51. 
Holditch, Sidney— IV. 
Honey locust beans — 47. 

Hopewell: burials — 37; copper spools — 38; general — 57; lithic material — 41. 
Houlka Creek — 2, 11. 

Houlka Gray pottery — 14, 17, 19, 20, 23, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 34. 
Houses — 1. (See also Post mold patterns.) 
Houston, Miss. — IV, 1. 
Hrdlicka, Ales — 42. 

Itawamba County — 54. 

Jennings, Dr. Jesse D. — IV, 1, 17, 18, 19, 22, 30, 31, 32, 35, 39, 40, 41, 
5>. 54. 55- 

Knives — 15. 

Lancaster, Parker — IV. 

Lead: rifle balls — 15, 16. 

Lee County — 17, 18, 19, 

Lewis and Kneberg — 39 40, 52. 

Lewis, T. M. N. — 51, 53. 

Limestone Tempered pottery — 17, 20, 21, 23, 26, 27, 30, 31, 34; series — 30, 33. 

Lithic artifacts: arrow point types — 39; discussion of — 39, 40, 41, 55; drills — 
40; flaked stone — 39; greenstone celts — 40; ground stone — 40; hematite — 
40; knives — 40; manos — 40; metates — 40; mortars — 40; pitted (nut) 
stones — 40; scrapers — 40; slate pendant — 40; spear point types — 39; type 
stone used — 41. 



(See also Galena.) 
30, 31, 32, 35, 39, 40, 41, 51, 52, 54, 55, 56. 



Ill 



Long Branch Fabric Marked pottery — 31. 
Los Angeles County Museum — IV. 

Manos — 40. 

Marksville Incised pottery — 17, 23. 

Marksville period — 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 39, 40, 57. 

Marksville Stamped pottery — 12, 17, 20, 23, 51, 54. 

McDougall, Dr. W. B.— 3. 

McKelvey scries — 30, 33. 

McQuorquodale Mound — 40, 41, 57. 

McVay, Dr. T. N.— 36, 37. 

MCs-4, site of — 31, 54. 

Metallurgy — 55. (See also Copper; Galena; Silver.) 

Metates — 40. 

Middle Mississippi — 22. 

Miller periods— 32, 33, 35, 39, 40, 41, 54, 57. 

Minority type pottery — -20. 

Miscellaneous pottery types — 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27. 

Mississippi — 1, 30, 31, 40, 42, 57. 

Mississippi State Highway Commission — IV, 3. 

MLe-62, site of — 54, 55. 

Mobile Bay — 54. 

Mollusks. (See Shell.) 

Morrison, Dr. J. P. E. — 50. 

Mortar stones — 40. 

Mounds — 2, 5, 8, 9. 

Mound A — 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 20, 22, 23, 30, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 40, 
42, 51, 53, 54, 57; analysis of pottery — 22; burials — 6, 10, 42, 43, 44, 
45, 46; chronological position of — 34. 

Mound B — 6, 7, 9, 11, 14, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 30, 33, 36, 37, 38, 40, 
41, 42, 50, 51, 53, 54, 57; analysis of pottery — 23; burials — 9, 42, 43, 44, 
45, 46; chronological position of — 34; vegetal remains — 47. 

Mount C — 9, 32, 51, 53. 

Mound D — 2, 9, 11, 18, 20, 21, 29, 30, 31, 32, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 51, 
53> 54> 57! analysis of pottery from — 24; burials — 9; chronological posi- 
tion of — 34. 

Mound E — 9, 11, 32, 51, 53. 

Mound F — 9, 11, 32, 51, 53; analysis of pottery from — 24; chronological 
position of — 34. 

Moundville, Ala.: points — 39. 

Nashville, Tenn. — V. 

Natchez, Miss: city of — V, 2, 34; period — 30, 33. 

Natchez Trace — V, 41. 

Natchez Trace Parkway — IV, V, 1,2, 12, 34, 57. 

National Museum — 42, 45, 46, 50. 

National Park Service — V, 1. 

Newman, Dr. Marshall T. — 15, 42, 53, 54. 

Norris Basin — 31. 

Nut stones — 40. 

Opposum — 3, 49. 

Passion flower — 47. 

Pendants — 15. 

Pharr Mounds — 2. 

Pickwick Basin — 21, 30, 31, 33, 34, 37, 39, 40, 41, 52, 54. 

Pickwick Complicated Stamped pottery — 20. 

Pipes, lack of — 54. 

Placquemine period — 30, 33. 

Points: arrow — 16, 39; spear — 8, 11, 39. 

Pontotoc County — 54. 

Pontotoc Ridge — 2, 3. 

Post mold patterns: discussion of — 51, 52, 53. 

Pottery — 1, 2; analysis of by burials — 29; analysis of by features — 22, 25, 26, 

27, 28, 29; analysis of by mounds — 22, 23, 24; as grave goods, lack of — 56; 

sequence at Bynum — 31, 34, 35. 
Pottery types: Alexander Incised — 17, 21, 23, 24, 27, 29; Baldwin Plain — 9, 

14, 17, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 54; Furrs Cord- 

112 



marked — 12, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 
34, 54; Harmon's Creek Cordmarked — 31; Houlka Gray — 14, 17, 19, 20, 

23, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 34; Limestone Tempered — 17, 20, 21, 23, 26, 27, 
30, 31, 34; series — 33; Long Branch Fabric Marked — 31; Marksville In- 
cised — 17, 23; Marksville Stamped — 12, 17, 20, 23, 51, 54; minority 
types — 20; miscellaneous — 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27; Pickwick Compli- 
cated Stamped — 20; Saltillo Fabric Impressed — 12, 14, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23, 

24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 54; Single Cord Impressed — 17, 21, 
23, 26, 27; Tishomingo Cordmarked — 12, 14, 17, 19, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 
28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 54; Tishomingo Plain — 12, 14, 17, 20, 22, 23, 
26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 54; Wilson Plain — 22; Wright Check 
Stamp — 20. 

Prentiss County — 54. 

Quimby, George I. — 32, 39. 

Raccoon — 3, 49. 
Rifles— 15. 

Saltillo Fabric Impressed pottery — 12, 14, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 
30, 31, 32, a, 34, 54. 

Setzer, Dr. Henry W. — 3, 49. 

Shell — 3, 8, 12, 16, 54; analysis of material — 50; gorget — 15; hoes — 50, 55. 

Shell Tempered series — 33. 

Silver: buckle — 15; crown — 15. 

Single Cord Impressed pottery — 17, 21, 23, 26, 27. 

Sketetal material. (See also Burials.) Deformation — 45; dental pathol- 
ogy — 46; method of study — 42; report by Newman — 42; summary of — 46; 
Temple Mound I types — 45; Temple Mound II types — 45. 

Slate: pendant fragment — 40. 

Smith, H. R.— IV. 

Snakes, list of — 3. 

Spoons — 14, 15, 16. 

Squier and Davis— -36, 41. 

Stone, John C— IV. 

Stone tools. (See Lithic artifactts.) 

Tchefuncte — 30, 31, 32, 33, 39, 40, 52, 54; agreement of Bynum with — 56. 

Temple Mounds I and II — a, 42; skeletal material from — 45. 

Tennessee — 1, 31, 34, 38, 40, 54, 57. 

Textiles. (See Thread.) 

Thread, remains of — 37. 

Tishomingo Cordmarked pottery — 12, 14, 17, 19, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 

30, 31, 32, a, 34, 54. 
Tishomingo Plain pottery — 12, 14, 17, 20, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 

34, 54- 
Tomahawk pipe — 15. 
Tombigbee River — 2, 41, 54. 
Trace — V, 2, 34. 
Troyville period — 30, 31, 33. 
Tupelo, Miss. — 1, 30. 
Two Run Creek — 3 1 . 

"Uncle Joe" Bynum — 2. 

Village site: map of — 4. 

Wauchope, Robert — 31. 

Webb, William S. — 32, 37, 38, 40; Adena trait list — 55; Copena trait list — 55. 

Wheeler Basin — 31, 39, 40. 

Wheeler series — 30. 

Willey, Gordon R. — 20, 30, 32. 

Wilson Plain pottery — 22. 

Wimberly, Steve B. — 37. 

Woodland pattern — 31, 32, 39, 56, 57. 

Woodward, Arthur — IV, 15. 

Wright Check Stamp pottery — 20. 

Yazoo Valley — 31, 39, 51, 56. 



U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : O — 1951 



DA i - 

, 1,1 



' 1